Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

McJUNKIN v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., 2:15-cv-1966-LDG (PAL). (2017)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20170501v29 Visitors: 5
Filed: Apr. 28, 2017
Latest Update: Apr. 28, 2017
Summary: ORDER LLOYD D. GEORGE , District Judge . For good cause shown, THE COURT ORDERS that Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.'s Motion in Limine No. 1 to Strike Plaintiff's Expert; or, in the Alternative, to Preclude Unfounded Opinions offered by Plaintiffs [sic] Expert (ECF No. 34) is DENIED; THE COURT FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.'s Motion in Limine No. 2 to Preclude Non-retained Experts or Experts Who Have Not Prepared a Report, from Testifying about Causation, or Any
More

ORDER

For good cause shown,

THE COURT ORDERS that Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.'s Motion in Limine No. 1 to Strike Plaintiff's Expert; or, in the Alternative, to Preclude Unfounded Opinions offered by Plaintiffs [sic] Expert (ECF No. 34) is DENIED;

THE COURT FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.'s Motion in Limine No. 2 to Preclude Non-retained Experts or Experts Who Have Not Prepared a Report, from Testifying about Causation, or Any Opinions Outside of Those Set Forth in Their Treatment Records (ECF No. 35) is DENIED;

THE COURT FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.'s Motion in Limine No. 3 to Exclude the Contents of Plaintiff's Medical Records other than Statements Made by Plaintiff for Purposes of Diagnosis or Treatment, as Inadmissible Hearsay (ECF No. 36) is DENIED;

THE COURT FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.'s Motions in Limine Nos. 4, 5, 6, and 7 (ECF Nos. 37-40), as to which Plaintiff Angie McJunkin has filed non-responses (ECF No. 47), are GRANTED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer