Legal Opinion · Dissent

Enyart v. Blacketor

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided February 27, 1976No. 3-1273A162Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion

Staton, P.J.

I dissent. The purpose of the motion in limine has been exceeded by the trial court’s order which granted Blacketor’s motion in limine.1 A fair trial has been denied. A motion in limine should be granted to¡ exclude prejudicial matter which has no bearing on the issues or the rights of the parties. Burrus v. Silhavy (1973), 155 Ind. *229App. 558, 293 N.E.2d 794.2 A twenty-mile an hour speed limit sign near the scene of a collision between a motorist and a twelve year old girl on a bicycle bears on the issue of Blacketor’s negligence when he exceeded the posted speed.…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Bridges v. City of RichardsonTexas Supreme Court · 1962
  2. Burrus v. SilhavyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1973
  3. Comfort v. PennerWashington Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Mathias v. EichelbergerWashington Supreme Court · 1935
  5. Geisking v. SheimoSupreme Court of Iowa · 1960

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API