United States District Court, N.D. Mississippi, Greenville Division
DANNY DYKES, Individually and on behalf of the Estate and Wrongful Death Beneficiaries of James A. Dykes, Deceased PLAINTIFF
CLEVELAND NURSING & REHABILITATION CENTER; and JOHN AND JANE DOES I-X DEFENDANTS
M. BROWN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
medical malpractice action is before the Court for
consideration of Cleveland Nursing & Rehabilitation
Center's motion in limine. Doc. #108.
April 20, 2015, Danny Dykes filed a complaint in the Circuit
Court of Bolivar County, Mississippi, individually and on
behalf of the estate and wrongful death beneficiaries of
James A. Dykes, deceased, against Cleveland Nursing &
Rehabilitation Center and “John and Jane Does
I-X.” Doc. #2. In his complaint, Danny alleges that
James died as a result of negligence while a patient at the
defendant's nursing home facility. Id. at
¶¶ 7-8, 12. Cleveland Nursing subsequently removed
the state action to this Court on the ground of diversity
jurisdiction. Doc. #1 at ¶ 4.
15, 2018, following a period of discovery and two
unsuccessful motions to compel arbitration by Cleveland
Nursing, Cleveland Nursing filed a motion in limine. Doc.
#108. Danny responded in opposition to the motion. Doc. #111.
Cleveland Nursing did not reply.
purpose of a motion in limine is to allow the trial court to
rule in advance of trial on the admissibility and relevance
of certain forecasted evidence. Evidence should not be
excluded in limine unless it is clearly inadmissible on all
potential grounds.” Harkness v. Bauhaus
U.S.A., Inc., No. 3:13-cv-129, 2015 WL 631512,
at *1 (N.D. Miss. Feb. 13, 2015) (quotation marks and
Nursing's motion in limine seeks to exclude from trial:
(1) hearsay from James' healthcare providers; (2)
evidence or argument regarding documents not produced by
Cleveland Nursing; (3) lay opinion and hearsay evidence
regarding James' wound; (4) evidence regarding conditions
at the Cleveland Nursing facility; (5) evidence related to
punitive damages; (6) statements criticizing Cleveland
Nursing for not calling current or former staff members to
testify; (7) testimony or evidence referencing the size or
wealth of Cleveland Nursing; (8) references to Cleveland
Nursing's counsel; and (9) references to prior lawsuits
or complaints against Cleveland Nursing. Doc. #108 at 1-7.
Nursing first seeks to exclude “hearsay testimony about
what [James' family members] were told by one or more
healthcare providers regarding [James'] condition.”
Id. Danny responds that he does not intend to offer
such evidence. Doc. #111 at 3. Accordingly, the motion in
limine will be denied as moot on this point.
Documents Not Produced by Cleveland Nursing
Nursing argues “[t]he Court should preclude any
reference to documents allegedly not produced by Cleveland in
response to discovery or letter requests from Plaintiffs'
counsel.” Doc. #108 at 3. Danny represents that he does
not intend to offer such evidence. Doc. #111 at 3.
Accordingly, the motion will be denied as moot with respect
to this evidence.
Lay and Opinion Testimony Regarding James' Wound
Nursing moves to prevent various family members of James from
offering opinion testimony that James developed a wound due
to substandard care and that the wound would have healed had
it been treated properly. Doc. #108 at 3-4. Danny responds
that he does not intend to offer evidence on causation. Doc.
#111 at 3. However, Danny states:
family members are expected to testify that [James] developed
a pressure sore that turned into a stage 4 decubitus ulcer
while simultaneously observing that staff did not turn and
reposition [James] or change his soiled diapers as
frequently. Family members' observations that
[James'] ulcer developed and worsened in tandem with a
noticeable decline in the quality of care (i.e., less