Walters et al v. Flint et al, No. 5:2017cv10164 - Document 651 (E.D. Mich. 2022)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER denying as moot 509 Motion in Limine. Signed by District Judge Judith E. Levy. (WBar)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Walters et al v. Flint et al Doc. 651 Case 5:17-cv-10164-JEL-KGA ECF No. 651, PageID.43562 Filed 01/26/22 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION In re Flint Water Cases Judith E. Levy United States District Judge __________________________________/ This Order Relates To: Bellwether I Cases Case No. 17-10164 __________________________________/ OPINION AND ORDER DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANTS LOCKWOOD, ANDREWS & NEWNAM, INC. AND LOCKWOOD, ANDREWS & NEWNAM, P.C.’S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE REFERENCES TO LEGAL DUTIES [509] Before the Court is a motion in limine by Lockwood, Andrews & Newnam, Inc., and Lockwood, Andrews & Newnam, P.C.’s (collectively “LAN”) to exclude all references to legal duties. (ECF No. 509). Dockets.Justia.com Case 5:17-cv-10164-JEL-KGA ECF No. 651, PageID.43563 Filed 01/26/22 Page 2 of 3 This motion seeks an order preventing Plaintiffs from eliciting testimony about LAN’s legal duties. The existence of a legal duty under Michigan law is a legal question to be decided by the Court. Dyer v. Trachtman, 470 Mich. 45, 49 (2004) (citing Simko v. Blake, 448 Mich. 648, 655 (1995)). Accordingly, the issue of whether LAN owed a duty to Plaintiffs will be resolved in the Court’s forthcoming ruling on LAN’s motion for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth in the VNA summary judgment opinion, LAN owed Plaintiffs a legal duty under Michigan law. See In re Flint Water Cases, No. 17-10164, 2022 WL 94899, at *4-9 (E.D. Mich., Jan. 10, 2022) (“VNA”). Accordingly, the jury will not need to hear testimony on whether LAN owed Plaintiffs a legal duty. In response to this motion, Plaintiffs represent that they will conform their testimony to the Court’s opinions resolving the legal duty question. (ECF No. 538). Consistent with those opinions, there will be no need for testimony that seeks to establish the existence of a legal duty, except where such testimony establishes a predicate fact necessary to the duty finding. Farwell v. Keaton, 396 Mich. 281, 286 (1976).1 Plaintiffs Relevant predicate facts to the duty finding will be set forth in the summary judgment opinion. Testimony about such facts does not need to be cast in terms of 1 2 Case 5:17-cv-10164-JEL-KGA ECF No. 651, PageID.43564 Filed 01/26/22 Page 3 of 3 may also elicit testimony about the obligations of engineers insofar as such testimony is relevant to establishing the appropriate standard of care. Because there is no reason to enter an order asking Plaintiffs to comply with this Court’s other orders, LAN’s motion regarding legal duties is DENIED AS MOOT. IT IS SO ORDERED, Dated: January 26, 2022 Ann Arbor, Michigan s/Judith E. Levy JUDITH E. LEVY United States District Judge CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record and any unrepresented parties via the Court’s ECF System to their respective email or first-class U.S. mail addresses disclosed on the Notice of Electronic Filing on January 26, 2022. s/William Barkholz WILLIAM BARKHOLZ Case Manager legal duty, however, because the legal duty determination remains for the Court to determine. 3
]]>
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.
