Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Mayer Hoffman McCann, P.C. v. Camico Mutual Insurance Co.

United States District Court, N.D. California

May 10, 2017

MAYER HOFFMAN MCCANN, P.C., Plaintiff,
v.
CAMICO MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

          FINAL PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER Re: Dkt. Nos. 102-107, 112-122

          SUSAN ILLSTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         On May 10, 2017, the Court held a final pretrial conference in the above captioned matter, which is set for jury trial beginning May 15, 2017. All parties were represented by counsel. The following matters were resolved:

         1. Number of jurors and challenges: There will be a jury of 8 members. Each side shall have 4 peremptory challenges.

         2. Voir dire: The Court will conduct general voir dire, including various of the questions requested by counsel in their proposed additional voir dire filings. Counsel for each side shall have up to 20 minutes total to question the panel. The parties are directed to meet and confer concerning a neutral, non-argumentative statement of the case which can be read to the jury panel at the beginning of the voir dire process; this statement shall be provided to the Court no later than Friday, May 12, 2017 at 3:00 p.m.

         3. Jury instructions: The Court received proposed jury instructions from the parties; substantial disagreements remain between the parties. The parties are directed to meet and confer to resolve as many disputes as possible. The parties are further directed to provide to the Court no later than Monday, May 15, 2017 a succinct statement of the fundamental disagreements in the substantive instructions, together with the (few) competing instructions reflecting those disagreements. The Court will review same and inform counsel prior to closing argument which substantive instructions will be given.

         4. Trial exhibits: No later than Friday, May 12, 2017, the parties shall submit their trial exhibits, in binders with numbered tabs separating and identifying each exhibit. The Court shall be provided with three sets (the originals for the file, one set for the Court and one set for the witnesses). The parties represented at the pretrial conference that they have stipulated to the admissibility of all such exhibits.

         5. Timing of trial: Plaintiff estimates that the trial should take no more than 7-8 days, and defendant estimates it will take no more than 5 days. Based on these estimates, and a review of the other materials in the Joint Pretrial Conference Statement, the Court will set the matter for a 7 day trial, as follows: each side shall have up to 45 minutes to present opening statements; each side shall have 12.5 hours total for presentation of evidence, which includes direct and cross-examination and presentation of all exhibits; and each side shall have up to 1 hour for closing argument.

         6. Trial schedule: Jury selection will begin on May 15, 2017, at 8:30 a.m. The trial day runs from 8:30 a.m. until 3:30 p.m., with a 15 minute break at 10:00 a.m., a 30 minute break at noon and a 15 minute break at 2:00 p.m., all times approximate. The Court does not hear trials on Fridays, although juries may continue to deliberate on Fridays.

         7. Motions in limine: The parties filed approximately 16 motions in limine. Docket Nos. 102-107, 112-122. After consideration of the arguments made in the briefs and at the pretrial conference, the Court rules as follows:

Plaintiffs' motion #1 to preclude evidence regarding MHM's net worth, financial stability or fiscal results: DENIED without prejudice to raising specific objections to specific questions at the time of trial.
Plaintiffs' motion #2 to exclude witnesses other than the parties' designated trial representatives: GRANTED. Plaintiff has designated William Hancock; defendant has designated Gwen Theus.
Plaintiffs' motion #3 to preclude defendant from questioning or offering any testimony regarding Lemme Insurance Group E&O exposure or claim: DENIED without prejudice to raising specific objections to specific questions at the time of trial.
Plaintiffs' motion #4 to exclude opinion testimony from lay/fact witnesses: DENIED without prejudice to raising specific objections to specific questions at the time of trial.
Plaintiffs' motion #5 to exclude or limit testimony of defendant's expert Robert M. Hall: DENIED without prejudice to objecting to specific questions and testimony at trial. In general, plaintiff's objections go to the weight and not the admissibility of Mr. Hall's ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.