GUTHRIE v. BALL, 1:11-cv-333-SKL. (2014)
Court: District Court, E.D. Tennessee
Number: infdco20141010b29
Visitors: 17
Filed: Oct. 08, 2014
Latest Update: Oct. 08, 2014
Summary: ORDER SUSAN K. LEE, Magistrate Judge. Before the Court is an eighth motion in limine filed by Plaintiff Karen Guthrie, individually and on behalf of the Estate of Donald Guthrie ("Plaintiff"), to exclude evidence of third parties not identified in the comparative negligence affirmative defense raised by Defendant Gregory Ball, M.D. ("Defendant") [Doc. 84]. Defendant's amended answer states an affirmative defense of comparative fault as follows: Defendant reserves the right, should discovery
Summary: ORDER SUSAN K. LEE, Magistrate Judge. Before the Court is an eighth motion in limine filed by Plaintiff Karen Guthrie, individually and on behalf of the Estate of Donald Guthrie ("Plaintiff"), to exclude evidence of third parties not identified in the comparative negligence affirmative defense raised by Defendant Gregory Ball, M.D. ("Defendant") [Doc. 84]. Defendant's amended answer states an affirmative defense of comparative fault as follows: Defendant reserves the right, should discovery o..
More
ORDER
SUSAN K. LEE, Magistrate Judge.
Before the Court is an eighth motion in limine filed by Plaintiff Karen Guthrie, individually and on behalf of the Estate of Donald Guthrie ("Plaintiff"), to exclude evidence of third parties not identified in the comparative negligence affirmative defense raised by Defendant Gregory Ball, M.D. ("Defendant") [Doc. 84]. Defendant's amended answer states an affirmative defense of comparative fault as follows:
Defendant reserves the right, should discovery or evidence, including trial, indicate it appropriate, to plead the comparative negligence of Plaintiff or any other person or entity, as the proximate or contributing cause of all or a portion of Plaintiff's alleged injuries and damages and to take into account such evidence in apportioning and comparing negligence or fault, causation, or damages, whether in apportionment or mitigation. At this time, Defendant respectfully raises the comparative negligence of Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Watson Laboratories, Inc., a Nevada Company, Watson Laboratories, Inc., a Delaware Company, and Watson Pharma, Inc. (collectively, "Watson") as causing or contributing to Donald Guthrie's death by designing, manufacturing, developing, and/or distributing a defective fentanyl patch.
[Doc. 52, Page ID #: 327]. Defendant has filed a response to the motion in limine stating he agrees with the motion [Doc. 170]. Accordingly, the motion in limine [Doc. 84] is GRANTED.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
