Marine Power Holding, L.L.C. v. Malibu Boats, LLC, No. 2:2014cv00912 - Document 264 (E.D. La. 2016)

Court Description: ORDER AND REASONS that none of the demonstrative exhibits shall be shown to the jury until Marine Power's counsel has had an opportunity to object. Signed by Judge Lance M Africk on 8/4/2016.(blg)

Download PDF
Marine Power Holding, L.L.C. v. Malibu Boats, LLC Doc. 264 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA MARINE POWER HOLDING, L.L.C. VERSUS CIVIL ACTION No. 14-912 MALIBU BOATS, LLC SECTION I ORDER AND REASONS Continuing the endless saga of disagreements that has plagued this litigation , before the Court is plaintiff Marine Power Holding, L.L.C.’s (“Marine Power”) memorandum1 objecting to proposed demonstrative exhibits by Malibu Boats, LCC (“Malibu”). Malibu filed a response.2 Marine Power’s memorandum objects to four proposed demonstrative exhibits by Malibu. The first is a timeline compiled by Malibu’s attorneys that reflects Malibu’s theory of the case and characterizations of the evidence relating to the contractual relationship between the parties. 3 The second is a document compiled by Malibu’s attorneys that notes the five documents that Malibu believes comprise the contract at issue. 4 The third is a document that Malibu argues reflects facts and figures in their damages expert’s reports as well as her stated objections to the methodology employed by Marine Power’s damages expert. 5 The fourth is a statement on the standards for valuation services published by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (“AICPA”). 6 1 R. Doc. No. 247. R. Doc. No. 254. 3 R. Doc. No. 247-1. 4 R. Doc. No. 247-2. 5 R. Doc. No. 247-3. 6 R. Doc. No. 247-4. 2 Dockets.Justia.com It is unclear at this juncture (1) how Malibu proposes to use each exhibit, and (2) what foundation Malibu seeks to lay for each exhibit. How a party seeks to use demonstrative evidence determines the applicable legal test, the necessary foundation, and whether limiting instructions are necessary to mitigate any prejudice. See 2 McCormick on Evidence § 214 (7th Westlaw ed. 2016). Accordingly, the Court concludes that Marine Power’s objections are premature at this juncture because the Court will be in a better position at trial to determine whether Malibu has set out appropriate foundations for the demonstrative evidence, what limiting instructions would be appropriate, and whether the probative value of the demonstrative evidence will be substantially outweighed by a danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, or wasting time. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that none of the demonstrative exhibits shall be shown to the jury until Marine Power’s counsel has had an opportunity to object. New Orleans, Louisiana, August 4, 2016. _______________________________________ LANCE M. AFRICK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.