Opinion

Brown v. Schultz

  • 74 Va. Cir. 227
  • 2007 Va. Cir. LEXIS 177
Court
Rockingham County Circuit Court
Filed
Oct 2, 2007
Status
Published
Author
Lane
On the bench
Lane
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 13.8%

The opinion

By Judge James V. Lane

This matter came to be heard on Defendant’s Motion in Limine filed on September 17, 2007. Defendant asked that the Court exclude the expert testimony of Richard McGarry, toxicologist.

Defendant asserts that, due to admissions made concerning Defendant’s .15 blood-alcohol content and awareness of her impairment, Plaintiffs Designation of Expert Witnesses with respect to Mr. McGarry was “devoid of any evidence that was in dispute in this matter and therefore unless there was some additional specific evidence to be testified to by the toxicologist, a Motion in Limine would be filed.” After no supplemental report was filed by Plaintiff, Defendant filed this Motion.

Plaintiff correctly contests that a party in Virginia is not permitted to force another party to enter into a stipulation or to prove their case with a particular type of proof. “[A party] is not obliged to enter into an agreement whereby it is precluded from putting on its evidence simply because the [opposing party] is willing to make a qualified stipulation.” Hudson v. Commonwealth, 9 Va. App. 110, 112 (1989). Further, Plaintiff seeks to show, through the testimony of Mr. McGarry, additional facts not admitted by Defendant. For the reasons stated herein, Defendant’s Motion in Limine is denied.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.