Motion in Limine

In Belvin et al v. Electchester Management, LLC, 2022 WL 10586743 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 18, 2022) – in which plaintiffs assert claims of, inter alia, hostile work environment – the court ruled on various motions in limine filed by the parties. In one motion, defendant asked the court to preclude testimony from two nonparty employees of defendant…

Read More Other-Employee Harassment Relevant to Hostile Work Environment Claim, Court Holds
Share This:

A recent decision, Boyce v. Bruce Weber and Little Bear, Inc., 19-cv-3825, 2021 WL 2821154 (S.D.N.Y. July 7, 2021), is instructive as to how courts resolve evidentiary issues arising in the context of sexual harassment claims. In this case, plaintiff (a fashion model) asserts claims for sexual harassment against defendant Weber (a fashion photographer) under…

Read More Court Rules on “Modus Operandi” Witnesses in Bruce Weber Sexual Harassment Case
Share This:

In Boyce v. Weber and Little Bear, Inc., 19-cv-3825, 2020 WL 5209526 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 1, 2020), the court denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment (except in one respect) on plaintiff’s claims under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (“TVPA”), 18 U.S.C. § 1591 et seq.; the New York State Human Rights Law; and the New York…

Read More Trafficking Victims Protection Act Lawsuit Continues Against Fashion Photographer
Share This:

In Doton v. City of Syracuse, 11-CV-620, 2019 WL 6337326 (NDNY Nov. 27, 2019), a gender discrimination case, the court ruled on various motions in limine with respect to evidence the parties seek to introduce at the upcoming trial. Among other issues addressed by the court, defendants sought to preclude Plaintiff from offering “me too” evidence “regarding…

Read More Court Discusses “Me Too” Evidence in Gender Discrimination Case
Share This:

In Boger v. New York State Office of Parks, Recreation & Historic Preservation, 17-cv-289, 2019 WL 6038545 (N.D.N.Y. Nov. 14, 2019) – an age and discrimination case – the court, inter alia, precluded plaintiff from introducing so-called “me too” evidence from plaintiff’s co-workers who were also allegedly discriminated against. The court reasoned: Because Nagle and…

Read More Co-Worker Employment Discrimination Evidence Precluded as Prejudicial
Share This:

In Matthews v. Hewlett-Packard Company, 15-cv-3922, 2017 WL 6804075 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 22, 2017), a race discrimination/hostile work environment/retaliation case, the court explained and applied the principles applicable to the admissibility of expert testimony – under FRE 702/Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) – as to emotional distress damages. In sum, the court…

Read More Court Precludes Expert Testimony on Emotional Distress in Race Discrimination Case
Share This:

In Rao v. Rodriguez, No. 14-cv-1936, 2017 WL 1403214 (E.D.N.Y. Apr. 18, 2017), a race/national origin/age discrimination case, the court – having previously denied defendants’ motions for summary judgment – ruled on several motions in limine as to the evidence to be presented at trial. In one such motion, defendants sought to preclude “any evidence regarding a statement…

Read More Court Allows Evidence of Post-Termination “Brown Monkey” Remark in Race/National Origin Discrimination Case
Share This:

In Hefti v. Brand Union, Inc. (a wrongful termination lawsuit), decided July 2, 2014, the New York Supreme Court denied defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff alleged that she was subjected to discrimination based on her disability (clinical depression and bipolar disorder), including by forcing her to disclosing personal…

Read More Court Rejects Defendant’s Reliance on “After-Acquired Evidence” Doctrine
Share This:

Did a car accident cause plaintiff’s stroke? That is the question recently addressed by the First Department in Sadek v. Wesley. The court reversed a trial court ruling precluding plaintiff’s neurological experts from testifying and dismissing plaintiff’s complaint. This motor vehicle accident case arose from a collision between a limousine driven by plaintiff Sadek and a Greyhound…

Read More First Department Reverses Decision Precluding Expert Testimony on Causation and Condemns “Ambush” Trial Motion Practice
Share This: