United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
H. Lindsay Magistrate Judge.
case is set for trial by jury before the United States
Magistrate Judge on June 11, 2018. The final pretrial
conference was held on June 4, 2018. Plaintiff, Justine Moore
(“Moore”) has filed her Exhibit List (DN 30) and
Witness List (DN 31) to which Defendant, Safeco Insurance
Company of Illinois (“Safeco”), filed
objections. (Objections to Exhibit List, DN 44;
Objections to Witness List, DN 39.) Safeco also filed its
Exhibit List (DN 32) and Witness List (DN 33) to which Moore
filed objections. (Objections to Exhibit List, DN 40;
Objections to Witness List, DN 35.) All are ripe for review,
and the instant memorandum opinion and order will address
both Moore's and Safeco's motions.
summary of the factual allegations underlying this case will
help to put the parties' motions in context. This is an
underinsured motorist (“UIM”) coverage and bad
faith case. Moore was involved in a motor vehicle accident on
August 23, 2004 with non-party, Isaak Anderson. (DN 1-1, at
PageID # 6; DN 5, at PageID# 20.) Moore alleges that she was
insured under a UIM policy issued by Safeco at the time of
the accident. Moore settled with Anderson and requested
additional monies from Safeco pursuant to her underinsured
motorist coverage. Moore has now sued Safeco for breach of
contract, violation of the Kentucky Unfair Claims Settlement
Practices Act, and bad faith.
Moore's Objections to Safeco's Exhibit List (DN
Dr. Michael M. Best's Expert Report
lists the expert report of Dr. Michael M. Best (“Dr.
Best”) as an exhibit it intends to introduce at trial.
(DN 32, at PageID # 90.) Moore objects on grounds that
introducing Dr. Best's Report is cumulative and
prejudicial to Moore as it in essence allows the jury to hear
Dr. Best's testimony twice and take it to the jury room
with them. (DN 40, at PageID # 131.)
Best is expected to testify at trial via videotaped trial
deposition testimony. (DN 33, at PageID # 92.) Therefore, Dr.
Best's opinion will be introduced to the jury via his
testimony, not by his expert report. Accordingly, Moore's
objection is hereby SUSTAINED. No. party shall be permitted
to introduce the expert report of Dr. Best at trial.
Exhibits from Dr. Best's Deposition
lists the videotaped trial deposition with exhibits of Dr.
Best as an exhibit it intends to introduce at trial. (DN 32,
at PageID # 90.) Moore objects because the deposition of Dr.
Best had not yet occurred at the time she filed her
Court's Pretrial Order requires a party to file a written
objection to any excerpt of a deposition an opposing party
plans to use at trial so objections can be dealt with in
advance. (DN 26, at PageID # 76.) Therefore, Moore's
objection to preserve all objections is SUSTAINED. Pursuant
to the Court's June 5, 2018 Pretrial Conference Order,
Moore is directed to file any objections to any exhibits to
Dr. Best's deposition on or before 5:00 p.m. on
June 7, 2018.
Deposition Transcripts of Justine Moore, Isaak Anderson,
Mackenzie Hornback, and Vellancis Robinson
lists “[a]ll transcripts and/or videos of all fact
depositions taken in this case . . .” as exhibits it
intends to introduce at trial. (DN 32, at Page ID # 90.)
Moore objects on grounds that introducing the transcripts of
witnesses who are going to testify live at trial is
cumulative and would allow the witnesses to be in the jury
room during deliberations. (DN 40, at Page ID # 132.)
Moore, Isaak Anderson, Mackenzie Hornback, and Vellancis
Robinson are all expected to testify live at trial. (DN 31,
at Page ID # 86-87; DN 33, at Page ID # 92.) Therefore, their
deposition testimony will only be admissible at trial to the
extent it is introduced by either party for impeachment
purposes. Moore's objection is hereby SUSTAINED. No.
party shall be permitted to introduce the entire deposition
transcript of Justine Moore, Isaak Anderson, Mackenzie
Hornback, or Vellancis Robinson at trial. The Court reserves
a ruling as to whether portions of the deposition transcripts
of the above-named individuals may be admissible for some
other purpose under the Federal Rules of Evidence.
All Documents ...