Legal Opinion

Bynum v. MVM, Inc.

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided March 20, 2007No. Civil Action No. 04-0259(PLF)PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

PAUL L. FRIEDMAN, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs motion in limine [33] (“Mot.”) and defendant’s opposition thereto (“Opp.”). Plaintiff requests that three categories of evidence be excluded from the upcoming trial: (1) the expert testimony of Dr. L. Chelton; (2) evidence concerning plaintiffs post-termination workplace injury; and (3) MVM’s offer of employment to plaintiff during settlement negotiations. See Mot. at 3. Upon careful consideration, the Court grants plaintiffs motion in part and denies it in part without prejudice.

Dr.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Sullivan v. Glock, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 1997
  2. Wreath v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1995
  3. Kirkham v. Société Air FranceDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2006
  4. Riddick v. Washington Hospital CenterDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1998

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Castro-Medina v. Procter & Gamble Commercial Co.District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2008
  2. Daniels v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2014
  3. Hancock v. Washington Hospital CenterCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2014
  4. St. Paul Mercury Insurance v. Capitol Sprinkler Inspection, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2007
  5. Chaudhry v. SmithDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2020

2 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