Litigation
Cal. Litig. VOLUME 38, ISSUE 1, MAY 2025
Content
- Ai In Criminal Cases In 2025: Use of Facial Recognition Technology
- Caci 1805: a Comedy of Errors
- California Gun Violence Restraining Order Blueprint
- Chair's Column
- Editor's Foreword: a Supra-eme Farewell
- How To Improve (And Not Blow!) Your Chances For Obtaining Appellate Writ Relief
- Inside This Issue
- Interview With Magistrate Judge Michelle M. Pettit
- Litigating Sex Trafficking Cases Involving Online Platforms: Strategies and Considerations For Advocacy On Behalf of Survivors
- PAST SECTION CHAIRS & EDITORS-IN-CHIEF
- Psych Records In Emotional Distress Cases: Where We Went Wrong and How To Fix It
- SECTION OFFICERS & EDITORIAL BOARD
- Settlement Conferences V. Mediations: a Distinction Without a Purpose?
- Success In Trial: the Work After the Courtroom Closes
- Table of Contents
- Motions In Limine: the Right To a Fair Trial
MOTIONS IN LIMINE: THE RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL
KELLY V. NEW WEST FEDERAL SAVINGS (1996) 49 CAL.APP.4TH 659
Writen by Hon. J. Gary Hastings (ret.)
During my 13 years as a trial lawyer, I had occasion to file motions in limine but only when I thought they were appropriate. I didn’t file many because most of the time, I did not perceive there to be significant issues that needed to be addressed by a proper motion in limine before the trial began.
One of the purposes of a motion in limine is to get a tentative ruling from the court on evidence one or more of the parties may want to admit or exclude during trial. Very often the issue is whether the evidence proffered is unduly prejudicial (Evid. Code, § 352; Fed. Rules Evid., rule 403). Or it may be that the opposing party believes the proponent may not be able to lay the proper foundation for the evidence they will seek to admit.