“There is less need for the gatekeeper to keep the gate when the gatekeeper is keeping the gate only for himself.”
How later courts described this case
- “There is less need for the gatekeeper to keep the gate when the gatekeeper is keeping the gate only for himself.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
NBIS CONSTRUCTION &
TRANSPORT INSURANCE
SERVICES, INC., a/s/o Sims Crane
& Equipment Company,
Plaintiff, Case No. 8:19-cv-2777-AAS
v.
LIEBHERR-AMERICA, INC., d/b/a
LIEBHERR USA, CO., f/k/a
LIEBHERR CRANES, INC.,
Defendant.
___________________________________/
ORDER
Both parties moved in limine before this case changed from a jury trial
to a non-jury trial. (Docs. 65, 66). Because this case is now set for a non-jury
trial and the court is now the finder of fact and the ruler of law, pre-trial
motions to exclude evidence, including expert opinions, are unlikely to succeed.
See United States v. Brown, 415 F.3d 1257, 1269 (11th Cir. 2005) (“There is
less need for the gatekeeper to keep the gate when the gatekeeper is keeping
the gate only for himself.”); see also City of S. Miami v. Desantis, No. 19-CV-
22927-BLOOM/Louis, 2020 WL 7074644, at *6-7 (S.D. Fla. Dec. 3, 2020)
(discussing how considering borderline admissible evidence is less of concern
for bench trials). Instead, the court can address these issues with the benefit
of the context of the trial and can disregard inadmissible evidence.
Thus, the parties’ motions in limine (Docs. 65, 66) are DENIED without
prejudice. The parties may revisit these issues during the non-jury trial, if
appropriate.
ORDERED in Tampa, Florida on June 22, 2021.
Aranda. Agneh Sarioug
AMANDA ARNOLD SANSONE
United States Magistrate Judge