Preview
FILED
2/16/2024 8:54 AM
FELICIA PITRE
DISTRICT CLERK
DALLAS CO., TEXAS
Martin Reyes DEPUTY
NO. DC-22-10691
JUAN ARTURO CABALLERO § IN THE DISTRICT COURT
§
V. § 192ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT
§
FERNANDO VALDEZ JR. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
MOTION IN LIMINE
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
COMES NOW FERNANDO VALDEZ JR., hereinafter referred to as "Defendant," and
before any proceedings before the jury, makes and files this MOTION IN LIMINE, and
respectfully moves the Court to instruct Plaintiff and Plaintiff's counsel to refrain from either
directly or indirectly, upon voir dire examination, opening statement, interrogation of witnesses,
introduction of any evidence, argument, objections before the jury, reading of any portion of the
pleadings, or by any other means or in any other manner, informing the jury, or bringing to the
jury's attention, any of the matters set forth in the numbered paragraphs below, unless and until
such matters have been first called to the attention of the Court, out of the presence and/or hearing
of the jury, and a favorable ruling has been obtained from the Court as to the admissibility and
relevance of any such matters:
1. Insurance. Unless an insurance company is a named Defendant, that the Defendant is or
is not protected, in whole or in part, by liability insurance, or that defense counsel was
retained by, or all or any part of the costs of defense, or of any resulting judgment, are or
will be paid by an insurance company, or any other matter suggesting an involvement of
any insurance company with the defense of the case including the fact that representatives
of Defendant has or has not made payments to anyone. Further, Plaintiff or Plaintiff's
counsel should not insinuate or state that this is a “liability case” or words to that effect as
that would suggest that insurance is involved. Such comments would be prejudicial to
Defendant.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE
Page 1
2. Employment of Defense Counsel. Any reference or insinuation that undersigned attorney
was “provided for the Defendant” or that their attorney will be compensated by some entity
other than Defendant, as such would be an attempt to show insurance coverage or that
counsel works for a firm that specializes in defending or prosecuting cases of this type.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
3. Liability Insurance Actors. Any reference to liability insurance, adjuster, agent, claims
people, “his company”, or that the Defendant has “other resources”, or any other comments
regarding same which directly or indirectly by innuendo would lead the jury to believe that
liability insurance for Defendant is involved herein.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
4. Liability or Non-Liabilitv for Judgment. That the named Defendant may or may not
have to pay any resulting judgment.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
5. Property Damage. Unless damages for property are sought by Plaintiffs, any reference
to amounts paid for repair to Plaintiffs' vehicle and any questions related to who paid for
the property damage as such questions would be irrelevant regarding negligence. Further,
these questions are designed solely to elicit testimony related to insurance coverage and
“responsibility” which is prejudicial to Defendant.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
6. Hearsay Medical Opinions. Any hearsay statement offered for the truth of the statement
by an allegedly injured person concerning any diagnosis or medical opinions
communicated to such person by a physician or other health care provider. Such would
be an attempt to introduce before the jury expert testimony without a proper predicate
concerning the experts’ qualifications and abilities to give such testimony.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
7. Hardship or Privation. Any argument or suggestion that a failure to award damages will
cause a Plaintiffs' privation or financial hardship. Also any testimony or argument that
Plaintiffs' medical bills were not paid because Plaintiff does not have the ability to pay the
medical bills when the bills are covered by an attorney letter of protection.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
8. Calculation of Economic Damages. Plaintiff be prohibited from introducing any
evidence, offering any testimony, or making any argument regarding undisclosed
economic damages. Pursuant to TRCP 194.2, Plaintiff is required to disclose the amount
DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE
Page 2
and method of calculating economic damages. Pursuant to TRCP 193.6, information and
material not disclosed through discovery may not be introduced into evidence.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
9. Statements of Law. Counsel be prohibited from making any statement of the law other
than that regarding the burden of proof and the basic legal definitions before the Charge
conference. This includes references to “violations of traffic laws” or “rules of the road”
or “safety laws.”
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
10. Cellphone Usage. Plaintiff and his counsel be prohibited from making any argument or
testifying as to any alleged use of a cellphone/mobile device by the Defendant as there is
no evidence or records to support such allegation. There is no mention of cellphone usage
being a factor on the Crash Report, nor any evidence or admission of cellphone usage being
a factor. The clear prejudicial nature of such argument or testimony outweighs any
probative value.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
11. Attorneys' Fees. That any party will have to pay attorneys' fees, or any reference to the
amount or basis of any attorneys' fees, unless a claim for recovery of attorneys' fees in the
case will be submitted to the jury.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
12. Criminal Offenses. That any party or witness has been suspected of, arrested for, charged
with or convicted of any criminal offense unless there is evidence of a specific conviction
that the Court has previously ruled is admissible in the case.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
13. Settlement Negotiations or Mediation. Any negotiations, offers or demands with respect
to any attempted settlement or mediation. TRCE 408; Beutel vs. Paul, 741 S.W.2d 510
(Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1987, no writ).
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
14. Prior Suits or Claims. That any party has been a party to any prior lawsuit, or has asserted
any prior claim, or that any prior claim has been asserted against a party, including that of
Passenger Piedra.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE
Page 3
15. Ex Parte Statements of Witnesses. Any reference to any ex parte statement of any
witness or alleged witness, other than an adverse party or agent of an adverse party, unless
and until such witness has been called to testify and has given testimony conflicting with
such ex parte statement. A deposition or a statement in business or medical records that
have been proved up as required by the Rules of Evidence is not an ex parte statement.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
16. Photographs and Visual Aids. Showing any documents, photographs or visual aids to
the jury, or displaying same in such manner that the jury or any member thereof can see
the same, unless and until the same has been tendered to opposing counsel, and has been
admitted in evidence or approved for admission or use before the jury, either by the Court
or by all counsel.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
17. Stipulations. Requesting Defendant or their attorneys to stipulate to either the
admissibility of any evidence or to any facts in front of the jury. Further, any comment or
statement that relates to the timing of any such stipulation. Tex. R. Evid. 401-403.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
18. Social Cost of Award. Any argument or suggestion that an award of damages will affect
insurance premiums, the price of any goods or services, or the level of taxation.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
19. “In Their Shoes” or Golden Rule. Any argument or suggestion that the jurors should put
themselves in the position of a party. Any argument or comment to the effect that juror
should place themselves in the position of Plaintiff in this cause in determining the amount
of recovery the Plaintiff should receive in this case. World Wide Tire Co. vs. Brown, 644
S.W.2d 144 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1982, writ ref’d n.r.e.).
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
20. Counsel’s Opinion of Credibility. Any expression of counsel's personal opinion
regarding the credibility of any witness. Wallace vs. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., 413 S.W.2d
787, 790 (Tex. Civ. App.—Houston 1967, writ ref’d n.r.e.).
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
21. Effect of Answers to Jury Questions. Any argument that any finding or failure to find in
response to a particular jury question will or will not result in a judgment favorable to any
party. This provision does not bar argument by counsel that a particular jury question
should be answered in a particular way. Cooper vs. Argonaut Insurance Co., 430 S.W. 2d.
DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE
Page 4
35 (Tex. Civ. App.—Dallas 1968, writ ref’d n.r.e.). Such argument is improper under the
Texas special verdict system because it advises the jury of the effect of its answers.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
22. Prior Automobile Accidents. Any inquiry into or disclosing that the Defendant has been
involved in any prior or subsequent automobile accident. Any testimony regarding
previous or subsequent accidents is irrelevant and far too prejudicial to discuss before the
jury.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
23. Prior Speeding Tickets. Any inquiry into or disclosing that the Defendant has ever been
issued any speeding tickets prior to or subsequent to this accident. As the Texas Supreme
Court wrote in Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Co. vs. May, 600 S.W.2d. 755 (Tex.
1980), “as a general rule, evidence of similar acts is inadmissible on the issue of whether
someone was a negligent in doing or not doing a particular act.”
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
24. Acceptance of responsibility. Plaintiff will not question Defendant as to whether
Defendant accepts “responsibility” “accountability” or “fault” for the occurrence in
question. These terms are vague and ambiguous and such argument opens the door to
negotiations, settlement and insurance. Any suggestion of prior negotiations and offers are
irrelevant and inadmissible during trial. This does not prohibit Plaintiffs from arguing that
Defendant is legally liable/negligent for the accident. The correct legal term is
“Negligence”, is defined in the charge, and is permissible for use throughout trial.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
25. Failure to settle. Any suggestion that it is the fault of the Defendant or that the Defendant
is responsible for the case having to go to trial. Such argument suggests that Defendant
failed to make any offer of settlement and opens the door to negotiations.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
26. Totaled vehicle. Plaintiffs will not use the words “totaled” or “total loss” or any such
similar word to describe any damage to any vehicle because such mentioning is misleading
and suggests the protection of insurance by the parties.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE
Page 5
27. Statements of Law Regarding 18.001 Counter Affidavits. Plaintiff's counsel be
prohibited from making any statements regarding the legal procedures and legal effect
relating to the filing of 18.001 Medical Billing Affidavits under the Texas Civil Practice
and Remedies Code. Specifically, Plaintiff attorney be prohibited from telling the jury that
Defendant did not file certain counter affidavits. Further, the Plaintiff's counsel be
prohibited from stating that the 18.001 Affidavits filed by Plaintiff is undisputed and/or
uncontroverted. Such an argument improperly shifts the burden of proof to the Defense.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
28. Testimony of Absent Witness. Any statement or suggestion as to the probable testimony
of any witness or alleged witness who is unavailable to testify, or whom the party
suggesting such testimony does not, in good faith, expect to testify in the trial. If the party
is expected to testify by deposition, this provision does not apply to testimony contained in
the deposition expected to be offered. Sanders v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 429
S.W.2d 516 (Tex. Civ. App.—Texarkana 1968, writ re’d n.r.e.).
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
29. Qualifying Expert Witness. Calling any witness to testify as an expert without having
first been qualified as an expert for those matters which were disclosed in response to
Request for Disclosure. In addition, prior to the expert stating any opinion he must be
required to disclose the underlying facts or data which forms his “expert” opinion pursuant
to Rule 705 of the Texas Rules of Evidence.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
30. Repair Estimate. From mentioning or attempting to admit vehicle repair estimates, or any
discussion of property damage, or alluding to the existence or amount thereof, which has
not been pled and is not at issue in or relevant to this case.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
31. Property Damage Related to Bodily Injury. Any mention, reference, or argument that
photographs of property damage, estimates, and/or repair costs have any impact
whatsoever on the medical bills or pain, suffering or mental anguish alleged in this lawsuit.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
32. Sympathy of Defendant. That neither the Plaintiff nor any person related to the Plaintiff
within the second degree by consanguinity or affinity mention, state, infer, imply or elicit
statements or testimony that Defendant made any communication expressing sympathy or
a general sense of benevolence relating to the pain, suffering, or death of an individual
DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE
Page 6
involved in the accident which is the subject of this lawsuit. Texas Civil Practice And
Remedies Code, § 18.061.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
33. Comments on “effects on society” and “sending a message” or “protecting society as
a whole.” Plaintiff be prohibited from making any argument, comment or inference during
any phase of this trial that Defendant should be held accountable or responsible so that it
sends a message on behalf of society as a whole, to protect ‘community safety’, or to send
a message that a particular behavior will not be tolerated.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
34. Income Tax. That any recovery will or will not be subject to income taxes, in whole or in
part.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
35. Failure to Call Witness. Any reference to the failure of an opposing party to call any
witness.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
36. Evidence Not Produced in Discovery Response to a Proper Request. Calling any
witness, or offering any document in evidence, if the identity of such witness or the
document has not been disclosed in response to a proper discovery request. If a party has
a good faith basis to urge that such witness or document should be received either because
(a) no discovery request properly called for its disclosure, or (b) good cause existed for
failure timely to disclose, such party shall first approach the bench and secure a ruling
thereon. Counsel is advised that to the extent possible or predictable, such matters should
be addressed and a ruling sought at pretrial once the case is assigned for trial. City of San
Antonio vs. Fulcher, 749 S.W.2d 217, 220 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1988, writ den).
TRCP 215.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
37. Objections to Evidence Not Produced in Discovery. Any objection based on failure to
disclose evidence in pre-trial discovery. Any party desiring to urge any such objection
shall request to approach the bench and urge such objection outside the hearing of the jury.
To the extent possible or predictable, such matters should be addressed and a ruling sought
at pretrial once the case is assigned for trial, although the objection may be urged for the
record outside the hearing of the jury at the time such evidence is offered in the event the
Court has overruled the objection at pretrial.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE
Page 7
38. Experts not Designated. Calling any expert to testify at trial, other than the experts
expressly identified in response to Defendant's Request for Disclosure. TRCP 194 and 195;
Trubell vs. Patton, 582 S.W. 2d 606 (Tex. Civ. App.-Tyler 1979, no writ).
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
39. Unqualified Expert Opinion. Any testimony regarding the cost of future disability, future
impairment, future wage loss or impaired earning capacity from any person not previously
qualified as a medical expert, economics expert or other qualified expert.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
40. Untimely Disclosed Treatment. Any testimony or reference to medical treatment,
diagnoses, treatment recommendations and the like after August 10, 2021. There was no
discovery or production of any evidence or potential evidence to support treatment
occurred after that day.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
41. Undisclosed or Untimely Disclosed Witness. Testimony of any individuals not
previously specifically or timely identified by the Plaintiffs as being a witness or having
knowledge of facts relevant to the subject matter of this lawsuit including any witness
whose name may have been provided. Tex. R. Civ. P. 192-195, 215.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
42. Undisclosed or Untimely Disclosed Rebuttal Witness. Any rebuttal witnesses, fact or
expert, not previously disclosed and identified in a timely fashion. Testimony rebutting
evidence produced by Defendant when Plaintiff failed to designate individuals known to
them to have knowledge of facts unfavorable to Defendant's theory of the case. Tex. R.
Civ. P. 192-195, 215.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
43. Undisclosed or Untimely Disclosed Evidence. Any items previously requested in
discovery or that should have been disclosed which have not been timely produced and/or
disclosed. Tex. R. Civ. P. 192-195, 215.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
44. Undisclosed or Untimely Disclosed Lay Witness Opinions. Opinions of lay witnesses
not previously identified as having knowledge of facts relevant to the issue about which
they are to give testimony nor identified as having expert opinions about the issue.
DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE
Page 8
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
45. Available Assets. Any inquiry into or reference to the assets Defendant has available for
investigating, preparing and defending this cause. First Nat’l Bank of Marshall vs. Beavers,
619 S.W.2d 288 (Tex. Civ. App.—Texarkana 1981, writ ref’d n.r.e.); Wimoth vs.
Limestone Prods. Co., 255 S.W.2d 532, 534 (Tex. App.—Waco 1953, writ ref’d n.r.e.).
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
46. Existence of Motion in Limine. Any reference to this Motion in Limine being filed or
that all or any portion of the relief requested herein has been granted or denied. Such
references are inherently prejudicial in that they suggest or infer that the Movant has sought
to prohibit proof or that the Court has excluded proof of matters damaging to the Plaintiffs'
cause. Burdick vs. York Oil Co., 364 S.W.2d 766 (Tex. Civ. App.—San Antonio 1963, writ
ref’d n.r.e.).
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
47. Privileged Information. Any inquiry or discussion regarding matters protected by the
work product doctrine and the party communications privilege. Specifically, examination
regarding the preparation and review of documents or information generated or
accumulated after anticipation of litigation.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
48. Superseded Pleadings. The contents of any pleadings which have been superseded by the
current pleadings on file in this case. Zock vs. Bank of the Southwest National Association,
Houston, 464 S.W.2d 375 (Tex. Civ. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1971, no writ).
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
49. Religious Practices/Beliefs. Any mention of a party or witness’s religious affiliation or
activities. Evidence of religious beliefs of a witness is not admissible to enhance or repair
credibility. TRCE 610.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
50. Expert’s Finances. Any reference to any request, either made in the past or made either
at trial or prior to trial, for personal financial records or appointment books from an expert
witness because such documents are generally not discoverable to demonstrate bias of a
nonparty witness.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE
Page 9
51. Counsel’s Personal Beliefs. The personal beliefs of Plaintiff's counsel concerning the
justice of Plaintiff's case and/or Plaintiff's right or entitlement to a recovery. Wallace v.
Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 413 S.W.2d 787, 790 (Tex. Civ.App.—Houston 1967, writ ref’d
n.r.e.). Dawson-Austin v. Austin, 920 S.W.2d 776, 792-93 (Tex. App—Dallas, 1996).
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
52. Unrelated Matters Disclosed by Counsel. Any reference comment or mention by
Plaintiff's counsel regarding any unrelated separate clients, lawsuits, claims, settlements or
the amount thereof as such is irrelevant and directly or indirectly would lead the jury to
believe that liability insurance for Defendant is involved herein. Further, any probative
value of such reference is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice towards the
Defendant.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
53. Delay of Justice. Any reference to or statement that Plaintiff or counsel for Plaintiff that
Plaintiff has had to wait a certain amount of time for trial or justice, or implying that
Defendant has caused a delay in the case being tried.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
54. Juror Commitment to Decision. Any requests on voir dire that panel members commit
themselves to answering jury questions in a certain way if the evidence shows certain
hypothetical facts be true.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
55. Jurisdictional Limits. Plaintiff be prohibited from making any argument, comment or
inference during any phase of this trial regarding the jurisdictional limits of this court.
GRANTED DENIED AGREED
DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE
Page 10
Respectfully submitted,
SUZANNE I. CALVERT & ASSOCIATES
Jamie L. Saleh
State Bar No. 24056253
900 Jackson Street
Suite 700
Dallas, TX 75202
Phone No. (214) 748-3831
Fax No. (855) 418-9752
ntex.law-dallas-service.278o08@statefarm.com
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT
FERNANDO VALDEZ JR.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing instrument
has been served upon the following counsel of record electronically and in accordance with the
Texas Rules of Civil Procedure on this 16th day of February, 2024.
Ariana G. Hamilton
The Guerrero Law Offices
902 W. Commerce Street
Dallas, TX 75208
COUNSEL FOR: JUAN A. CABALLERO
Javier Gonzalez
The Law Office of Chrysti Bryant
8330 LBJ Freeway, Suite 860
Dallas, TX 75243
COUNSEL FOR: JUAN A. CABALLERO
Jamie L. Saleh
DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE
Page 11
NOTICE
All attorneys and staff of Suzanne I. Calvert & Associates are employees of the Law
Department of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company.
DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE
Page 12
Automated Certificate of eService
This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system.
The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system
on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing
certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a
certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.
Stacy Locke on behalf of Jamie Saleh
Bar No. 24056253
stacy.locke.vae52f@statefarm.com
Envelope ID: 84584295
Filing Code Description: Proposed Jury Charge
Filing Description: DEFENDANT'S
Status as of 2/16/2024 2:15 PM CST
Associated Case Party: JUANARTUROCABALLERO
Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
Ariana GuerreroHamilton ahamilton@guerrerolaw.com 2/16/2024 8:54:31 AM SENT
Coral Estrada cestrada@guerrerolaw.com 2/16/2024 8:54:31 AM SENT
Case Contacts
Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
Brenda Wadsworth brenda.wadsworth@kemper.com 2/16/2024 8:54:31 AM SENT
Noelia Navarrete noelia.navarrete@kemper.com 2/16/2024 8:54:31 AM SENT
Edward Russell edwardr@rolleeatonlaw.com 2/16/2024 8:54:31 AM SENT
Larry Rolle larryr@rolleeatonlaw.com 2/16/2024 8:54:31 AM SENT
Javier Gonzalez javier.gonzalez@kemper.com 2/16/2024 8:54:31 AM ERROR
Preview
FILED 2/16/2024 8:54 AM FELICIA PITRE DISTRICT CLERK DALLAS CO., TEXAS Martin Reyes DEPUTY NO. DC-22-10691 JUAN ARTURO CABALLERO § IN THE DISTRICT COURT § V. § 192ND JUDICIAL DISTRICT § FERNANDO VALDEZ JR. § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS MOTION IN LIMINE TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: COMES NOW FERNANDO VALDEZ JR., hereinafter referred to as "Defendant," and before any proceedings before the jury, makes and files this MOTION IN LIMINE, and respectfully moves the Court to instruct Plaintiff and Plaintiff's counsel to refrain from either directly or indirectly, upon voir dire examination, opening statement, interrogation of witnesses, introduction of any evidence, argument, objections before the jury, reading of any portion of the pleadings, or by any other means or in any other manner, informing the jury, or bringing to the jury's attention, any of the matters set forth in the numbered paragraphs below, unless and until such matters have been first called to the attention of the Court, out of the presence and/or hearing of the jury, and a favorable ruling has been obtained from the Court as to the admissibility and relevance of any such matters: 1. Insurance. Unless an insurance company is a named Defendant, that the Defendant is or is not protected, in whole or in part, by liability insurance, or that defense counsel was retained by, or all or any part of the costs of defense, or of any resulting judgment, are or will be paid by an insurance company, or any other matter suggesting an involvement of any insurance company with the defense of the case including the fact that representatives of Defendant has or has not made payments to anyone. Further, Plaintiff or Plaintiff's counsel should not insinuate or state that this is a “liability case” or words to that effect as that would suggest that insurance is involved. Such comments would be prejudicial to Defendant. GRANTED DENIED AGREED DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE Page 1 2. Employment of Defense Counsel. Any reference or insinuation that undersigned attorney was “provided for the Defendant” or that their attorney will be compensated by some entity other than Defendant, as such would be an attempt to show insurance coverage or that counsel works for a firm that specializes in defending or prosecuting cases of this type. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 3. Liability Insurance Actors. Any reference to liability insurance, adjuster, agent, claims people, “his company”, or that the Defendant has “other resources”, or any other comments regarding same which directly or indirectly by innuendo would lead the jury to believe that liability insurance for Defendant is involved herein. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 4. Liability or Non-Liabilitv for Judgment. That the named Defendant may or may not have to pay any resulting judgment. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 5. Property Damage. Unless damages for property are sought by Plaintiffs, any reference to amounts paid for repair to Plaintiffs' vehicle and any questions related to who paid for the property damage as such questions would be irrelevant regarding negligence. Further, these questions are designed solely to elicit testimony related to insurance coverage and “responsibility” which is prejudicial to Defendant. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 6. Hearsay Medical Opinions. Any hearsay statement offered for the truth of the statement by an allegedly injured person concerning any diagnosis or medical opinions communicated to such person by a physician or other health care provider. Such would be an attempt to introduce before the jury expert testimony without a proper predicate concerning the experts’ qualifications and abilities to give such testimony. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 7. Hardship or Privation. Any argument or suggestion that a failure to award damages will cause a Plaintiffs' privation or financial hardship. Also any testimony or argument that Plaintiffs' medical bills were not paid because Plaintiff does not have the ability to pay the medical bills when the bills are covered by an attorney letter of protection. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 8. Calculation of Economic Damages. Plaintiff be prohibited from introducing any evidence, offering any testimony, or making any argument regarding undisclosed economic damages. Pursuant to TRCP 194.2, Plaintiff is required to disclose the amount DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE Page 2 and method of calculating economic damages. Pursuant to TRCP 193.6, information and material not disclosed through discovery may not be introduced into evidence. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 9. Statements of Law. Counsel be prohibited from making any statement of the law other than that regarding the burden of proof and the basic legal definitions before the Charge conference. This includes references to “violations of traffic laws” or “rules of the road” or “safety laws.” GRANTED DENIED AGREED 10. Cellphone Usage. Plaintiff and his counsel be prohibited from making any argument or testifying as to any alleged use of a cellphone/mobile device by the Defendant as there is no evidence or records to support such allegation. There is no mention of cellphone usage being a factor on the Crash Report, nor any evidence or admission of cellphone usage being a factor. The clear prejudicial nature of such argument or testimony outweighs any probative value. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 11. Attorneys' Fees. That any party will have to pay attorneys' fees, or any reference to the amount or basis of any attorneys' fees, unless a claim for recovery of attorneys' fees in the case will be submitted to the jury. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 12. Criminal Offenses. That any party or witness has been suspected of, arrested for, charged with or convicted of any criminal offense unless there is evidence of a specific conviction that the Court has previously ruled is admissible in the case. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 13. Settlement Negotiations or Mediation. Any negotiations, offers or demands with respect to any attempted settlement or mediation. TRCE 408; Beutel vs. Paul, 741 S.W.2d 510 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1987, no writ). GRANTED DENIED AGREED 14. Prior Suits or Claims. That any party has been a party to any prior lawsuit, or has asserted any prior claim, or that any prior claim has been asserted against a party, including that of Passenger Piedra. GRANTED DENIED AGREED DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE Page 3 15. Ex Parte Statements of Witnesses. Any reference to any ex parte statement of any witness or alleged witness, other than an adverse party or agent of an adverse party, unless and until such witness has been called to testify and has given testimony conflicting with such ex parte statement. A deposition or a statement in business or medical records that have been proved up as required by the Rules of Evidence is not an ex parte statement. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 16. Photographs and Visual Aids. Showing any documents, photographs or visual aids to the jury, or displaying same in such manner that the jury or any member thereof can see the same, unless and until the same has been tendered to opposing counsel, and has been admitted in evidence or approved for admission or use before the jury, either by the Court or by all counsel. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 17. Stipulations. Requesting Defendant or their attorneys to stipulate to either the admissibility of any evidence or to any facts in front of the jury. Further, any comment or statement that relates to the timing of any such stipulation. Tex. R. Evid. 401-403. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 18. Social Cost of Award. Any argument or suggestion that an award of damages will affect insurance premiums, the price of any goods or services, or the level of taxation. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 19. “In Their Shoes” or Golden Rule. Any argument or suggestion that the jurors should put themselves in the position of a party. Any argument or comment to the effect that juror should place themselves in the position of Plaintiff in this cause in determining the amount of recovery the Plaintiff should receive in this case. World Wide Tire Co. vs. Brown, 644 S.W.2d 144 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1982, writ ref’d n.r.e.). GRANTED DENIED AGREED 20. Counsel’s Opinion of Credibility. Any expression of counsel's personal opinion regarding the credibility of any witness. Wallace vs. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., 413 S.W.2d 787, 790 (Tex. Civ. App.—Houston 1967, writ ref’d n.r.e.). GRANTED DENIED AGREED 21. Effect of Answers to Jury Questions. Any argument that any finding or failure to find in response to a particular jury question will or will not result in a judgment favorable to any party. This provision does not bar argument by counsel that a particular jury question should be answered in a particular way. Cooper vs. Argonaut Insurance Co., 430 S.W. 2d. DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE Page 4 35 (Tex. Civ. App.—Dallas 1968, writ ref’d n.r.e.). Such argument is improper under the Texas special verdict system because it advises the jury of the effect of its answers. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 22. Prior Automobile Accidents. Any inquiry into or disclosing that the Defendant has been involved in any prior or subsequent automobile accident. Any testimony regarding previous or subsequent accidents is irrelevant and far too prejudicial to discuss before the jury. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 23. Prior Speeding Tickets. Any inquiry into or disclosing that the Defendant has ever been issued any speeding tickets prior to or subsequent to this accident. As the Texas Supreme Court wrote in Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad Co. vs. May, 600 S.W.2d. 755 (Tex. 1980), “as a general rule, evidence of similar acts is inadmissible on the issue of whether someone was a negligent in doing or not doing a particular act.” GRANTED DENIED AGREED 24. Acceptance of responsibility. Plaintiff will not question Defendant as to whether Defendant accepts “responsibility” “accountability” or “fault” for the occurrence in question. These terms are vague and ambiguous and such argument opens the door to negotiations, settlement and insurance. Any suggestion of prior negotiations and offers are irrelevant and inadmissible during trial. This does not prohibit Plaintiffs from arguing that Defendant is legally liable/negligent for the accident. The correct legal term is “Negligence”, is defined in the charge, and is permissible for use throughout trial. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 25. Failure to settle. Any suggestion that it is the fault of the Defendant or that the Defendant is responsible for the case having to go to trial. Such argument suggests that Defendant failed to make any offer of settlement and opens the door to negotiations. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 26. Totaled vehicle. Plaintiffs will not use the words “totaled” or “total loss” or any such similar word to describe any damage to any vehicle because such mentioning is misleading and suggests the protection of insurance by the parties. GRANTED DENIED AGREED DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE Page 5 27. Statements of Law Regarding 18.001 Counter Affidavits. Plaintiff's counsel be prohibited from making any statements regarding the legal procedures and legal effect relating to the filing of 18.001 Medical Billing Affidavits under the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. Specifically, Plaintiff attorney be prohibited from telling the jury that Defendant did not file certain counter affidavits. Further, the Plaintiff's counsel be prohibited from stating that the 18.001 Affidavits filed by Plaintiff is undisputed and/or uncontroverted. Such an argument improperly shifts the burden of proof to the Defense. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 28. Testimony of Absent Witness. Any statement or suggestion as to the probable testimony of any witness or alleged witness who is unavailable to testify, or whom the party suggesting such testimony does not, in good faith, expect to testify in the trial. If the party is expected to testify by deposition, this provision does not apply to testimony contained in the deposition expected to be offered. Sanders v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 429 S.W.2d 516 (Tex. Civ. App.—Texarkana 1968, writ re’d n.r.e.). GRANTED DENIED AGREED 29. Qualifying Expert Witness. Calling any witness to testify as an expert without having first been qualified as an expert for those matters which were disclosed in response to Request for Disclosure. In addition, prior to the expert stating any opinion he must be required to disclose the underlying facts or data which forms his “expert” opinion pursuant to Rule 705 of the Texas Rules of Evidence. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 30. Repair Estimate. From mentioning or attempting to admit vehicle repair estimates, or any discussion of property damage, or alluding to the existence or amount thereof, which has not been pled and is not at issue in or relevant to this case. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 31. Property Damage Related to Bodily Injury. Any mention, reference, or argument that photographs of property damage, estimates, and/or repair costs have any impact whatsoever on the medical bills or pain, suffering or mental anguish alleged in this lawsuit. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 32. Sympathy of Defendant. That neither the Plaintiff nor any person related to the Plaintiff within the second degree by consanguinity or affinity mention, state, infer, imply or elicit statements or testimony that Defendant made any communication expressing sympathy or a general sense of benevolence relating to the pain, suffering, or death of an individual DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE Page 6 involved in the accident which is the subject of this lawsuit. Texas Civil Practice And Remedies Code, § 18.061. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 33. Comments on “effects on society” and “sending a message” or “protecting society as a whole.” Plaintiff be prohibited from making any argument, comment or inference during any phase of this trial that Defendant should be held accountable or responsible so that it sends a message on behalf of society as a whole, to protect ‘community safety’, or to send a message that a particular behavior will not be tolerated. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 34. Income Tax. That any recovery will or will not be subject to income taxes, in whole or in part. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 35. Failure to Call Witness. Any reference to the failure of an opposing party to call any witness. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 36. Evidence Not Produced in Discovery Response to a Proper Request. Calling any witness, or offering any document in evidence, if the identity of such witness or the document has not been disclosed in response to a proper discovery request. If a party has a good faith basis to urge that such witness or document should be received either because (a) no discovery request properly called for its disclosure, or (b) good cause existed for failure timely to disclose, such party shall first approach the bench and secure a ruling thereon. Counsel is advised that to the extent possible or predictable, such matters should be addressed and a ruling sought at pretrial once the case is assigned for trial. City of San Antonio vs. Fulcher, 749 S.W.2d 217, 220 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1988, writ den). TRCP 215. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 37. Objections to Evidence Not Produced in Discovery. Any objection based on failure to disclose evidence in pre-trial discovery. Any party desiring to urge any such objection shall request to approach the bench and urge such objection outside the hearing of the jury. To the extent possible or predictable, such matters should be addressed and a ruling sought at pretrial once the case is assigned for trial, although the objection may be urged for the record outside the hearing of the jury at the time such evidence is offered in the event the Court has overruled the objection at pretrial. GRANTED DENIED AGREED DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE Page 7 38. Experts not Designated. Calling any expert to testify at trial, other than the experts expressly identified in response to Defendant's Request for Disclosure. TRCP 194 and 195; Trubell vs. Patton, 582 S.W. 2d 606 (Tex. Civ. App.-Tyler 1979, no writ). GRANTED DENIED AGREED 39. Unqualified Expert Opinion. Any testimony regarding the cost of future disability, future impairment, future wage loss or impaired earning capacity from any person not previously qualified as a medical expert, economics expert or other qualified expert. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 40. Untimely Disclosed Treatment. Any testimony or reference to medical treatment, diagnoses, treatment recommendations and the like after August 10, 2021. There was no discovery or production of any evidence or potential evidence to support treatment occurred after that day. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 41. Undisclosed or Untimely Disclosed Witness. Testimony of any individuals not previously specifically or timely identified by the Plaintiffs as being a witness or having knowledge of facts relevant to the subject matter of this lawsuit including any witness whose name may have been provided. Tex. R. Civ. P. 192-195, 215. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 42. Undisclosed or Untimely Disclosed Rebuttal Witness. Any rebuttal witnesses, fact or expert, not previously disclosed and identified in a timely fashion. Testimony rebutting evidence produced by Defendant when Plaintiff failed to designate individuals known to them to have knowledge of facts unfavorable to Defendant's theory of the case. Tex. R. Civ. P. 192-195, 215. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 43. Undisclosed or Untimely Disclosed Evidence. Any items previously requested in discovery or that should have been disclosed which have not been timely produced and/or disclosed. Tex. R. Civ. P. 192-195, 215. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 44. Undisclosed or Untimely Disclosed Lay Witness Opinions. Opinions of lay witnesses not previously identified as having knowledge of facts relevant to the issue about which they are to give testimony nor identified as having expert opinions about the issue. DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE Page 8 GRANTED DENIED AGREED 45. Available Assets. Any inquiry into or reference to the assets Defendant has available for investigating, preparing and defending this cause. First Nat’l Bank of Marshall vs. Beavers, 619 S.W.2d 288 (Tex. Civ. App.—Texarkana 1981, writ ref’d n.r.e.); Wimoth vs. Limestone Prods. Co., 255 S.W.2d 532, 534 (Tex. App.—Waco 1953, writ ref’d n.r.e.). GRANTED DENIED AGREED 46. Existence of Motion in Limine. Any reference to this Motion in Limine being filed or that all or any portion of the relief requested herein has been granted or denied. Such references are inherently prejudicial in that they suggest or infer that the Movant has sought to prohibit proof or that the Court has excluded proof of matters damaging to the Plaintiffs' cause. Burdick vs. York Oil Co., 364 S.W.2d 766 (Tex. Civ. App.—San Antonio 1963, writ ref’d n.r.e.). GRANTED DENIED AGREED 47. Privileged Information. Any inquiry or discussion regarding matters protected by the work product doctrine and the party communications privilege. Specifically, examination regarding the preparation and review of documents or information generated or accumulated after anticipation of litigation. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 48. Superseded Pleadings. The contents of any pleadings which have been superseded by the current pleadings on file in this case. Zock vs. Bank of the Southwest National Association, Houston, 464 S.W.2d 375 (Tex. Civ. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1971, no writ). GRANTED DENIED AGREED 49. Religious Practices/Beliefs. Any mention of a party or witness’s religious affiliation or activities. Evidence of religious beliefs of a witness is not admissible to enhance or repair credibility. TRCE 610. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 50. Expert’s Finances. Any reference to any request, either made in the past or made either at trial or prior to trial, for personal financial records or appointment books from an expert witness because such documents are generally not discoverable to demonstrate bias of a nonparty witness. GRANTED DENIED AGREED DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE Page 9 51. Counsel’s Personal Beliefs. The personal beliefs of Plaintiff's counsel concerning the justice of Plaintiff's case and/or Plaintiff's right or entitlement to a recovery. Wallace v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 413 S.W.2d 787, 790 (Tex. Civ.App.—Houston 1967, writ ref’d n.r.e.). Dawson-Austin v. Austin, 920 S.W.2d 776, 792-93 (Tex. App—Dallas, 1996). GRANTED DENIED AGREED 52. Unrelated Matters Disclosed by Counsel. Any reference comment or mention by Plaintiff's counsel regarding any unrelated separate clients, lawsuits, claims, settlements or the amount thereof as such is irrelevant and directly or indirectly would lead the jury to believe that liability insurance for Defendant is involved herein. Further, any probative value of such reference is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice towards the Defendant. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 53. Delay of Justice. Any reference to or statement that Plaintiff or counsel for Plaintiff that Plaintiff has had to wait a certain amount of time for trial or justice, or implying that Defendant has caused a delay in the case being tried. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 54. Juror Commitment to Decision. Any requests on voir dire that panel members commit themselves to answering jury questions in a certain way if the evidence shows certain hypothetical facts be true. GRANTED DENIED AGREED 55. Jurisdictional Limits. Plaintiff be prohibited from making any argument, comment or inference during any phase of this trial regarding the jurisdictional limits of this court. GRANTED DENIED AGREED DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE Page 10 Respectfully submitted, SUZANNE I. CALVERT & ASSOCIATES Jamie L. Saleh State Bar No. 24056253 900 Jackson Street Suite 700 Dallas, TX 75202 Phone No. (214) 748-3831 Fax No. (855) 418-9752 ntex.law-dallas-service.278o08@statefarm.com COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT FERNANDO VALDEZ JR. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing instrument has been served upon the following counsel of record electronically and in accordance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure on this 16th day of February, 2024. Ariana G. Hamilton The Guerrero Law Offices 902 W. Commerce Street Dallas, TX 75208 COUNSEL FOR: JUAN A. CABALLERO Javier Gonzalez The Law Office of Chrysti Bryant 8330 LBJ Freeway, Suite 860 Dallas, TX 75243 COUNSEL FOR: JUAN A. CABALLERO Jamie L. Saleh DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE Page 11 NOTICE All attorneys and staff of Suzanne I. Calvert & Associates are employees of the Law Department of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE Page 12 Automated Certificate of eService This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system. The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules. Stacy Locke on behalf of Jamie Saleh Bar No. 24056253 stacy.locke.vae52f@statefarm.com Envelope ID: 84584295 Filing Code Description: Proposed Jury Charge Filing Description: DEFENDANT'S Status as of 2/16/2024 2:15 PM CST Associated Case Party: JUANARTUROCABALLERO Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Ariana GuerreroHamilton ahamilton@guerrerolaw.com 2/16/2024 8:54:31 AM SENT Coral Estrada cestrada@guerrerolaw.com 2/16/2024 8:54:31 AM SENT Case Contacts Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Brenda Wadsworth brenda.wadsworth@kemper.com 2/16/2024 8:54:31 AM SENT Noelia Navarrete noelia.navarrete@kemper.com 2/16/2024 8:54:31 AM SENT Edward Russell edwardr@rolleeatonlaw.com 2/16/2024 8:54:31 AM SENT Larry Rolle larryr@rolleeatonlaw.com 2/16/2024 8:54:31 AM SENT Javier Gonzalez javier.gonzalez@kemper.com 2/16/2024 8:54:31 AM ERROR