C.C. ex rel. Ginnever v. Suzuki Manufacturing of America Corporation, 4:16CV01271 ERW. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. Missouri
Number: infdco20180926d08
Visitors: 7
Filed: Sep. 25, 2018
Latest Update: Sep. 25, 2018
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER E. RICHARD WEBBER , Senior District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on Defendants Suzuki Manufacturing of America Corporation and Suzuki Motor Corporation's Motion to Reconsider the Court's Order Excluding Evidence or Argument About Warnings [251]. In their motion, Defendants assert that the Court's Order granting Plaintiff's Motion in Liminie to Exclude Evidence or Argument About Warnings [250] should be reconsidered because evidence and argument about war
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER E. RICHARD WEBBER , Senior District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on Defendants Suzuki Manufacturing of America Corporation and Suzuki Motor Corporation's Motion to Reconsider the Court's Order Excluding Evidence or Argument About Warnings [251]. In their motion, Defendants assert that the Court's Order granting Plaintiff's Motion in Liminie to Exclude Evidence or Argument About Warnings [250] should be reconsidered because evidence and argument about warn..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
E. RICHARD WEBBER, Senior District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants Suzuki Manufacturing of America Corporation and Suzuki Motor Corporation's Motion to Reconsider the Court's Order Excluding Evidence or Argument About Warnings [251].
In their motion, Defendants assert that the Court's Order granting Plaintiff's Motion in Liminie to Exclude Evidence or Argument About Warnings [250] should be reconsidered because evidence and argument about warnings is relevant as to (1) whether Plaintiff's use of the ATV was reasonable and foreseeable, (2) Plaintiff's comparative fault, and (3) Plaintiff's burden to prove that the Subject ATV was defectively designed in the first place.
The Court has dismissed Plaintiff's warning claims. The warnings on the Subject ATV address the riding of passengers, the appropriate age of operation, and the use of helmets, among other things. The defect in this case is the Subject ATV's handlebar grip and its separation. None of the warnings address the defect, therefore there is no relevant purpose to permitting this evidence.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants Suzuki Manufacturing of America Corporation and Suzuki Motor Corporation's Motion to Reconsider the Court's Order Excluding Evidence or Argument About Warnings [ECF No. 251] is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
