Where the defendant’s expert violates an order pertaining to the scope of testimony and makes representations regarding precluded testimony, the damage may be remedied by permitting the plaintiff to cross-examine the expert on the precluded testimony. Bohack v. Keller Industries, Inc., Case No. 4D03-4611, Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District, Jan. 26, 2005.
The plaintiff sued the defendant on, inter alia, a product liability claim after the plaintiff suffered injuries from a ladder manufactured by the defendant. The defendant moved in limine to preclude the plaintiff from making references to other ladder manufacturers. The motion was granted. However, during the trial, the defendant’s expert violated the order by referring to other “major manufacturers” of ladders. The plaintiff requested permission to cross-examine the expert regarding the other “major manufacturers” of ladders, and the court denied the motion. The plaintiff also moved for a mistrial, which was denied. The appellate court reversed. It held that once the defendant’s expert violated the order in limine, the only way to remedy the damage was to permit the plaintiff to cross-examine the expert on his representation concerning other ladder manufacturers.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]