Lehman Brothers Holdings v. Security National Mortage, No. 2:2011cv00519 - Document 180 (D. Utah 2016)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER granting Plaintiff's 159 Motion in Limine No. 3; and denying Defendant's 162 Motion in Limine No. 3. Signed by Judge Ted Stewart on 12/8/2016. (eat)

Download PDF
Lehman Brothers Holdings v. Security National Mortage Doc. 180 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH LEHMAN BROTHERS HOLDINGS INC., a Delaware corporation, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ON LBHI’S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 3 AND SNMC’S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 3 Plaintiff, v. SECURITYNATIONAL MORTGAGE COMPANY, a Utah corporation, Case No. 2:11-CV-519 TS Defendant. District Judge Ted Stewart This matter is before the Court on Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.’s (“LHBI”) Motion in Limine No. 3 and SecurityNational Mortgage Company’s (“SNMC”) Motion in Limine No. 3. These Motions concern the Indemnification Agreement between SNMC and Lehman Brothers Bank, FSB (“LBB”) and Aurora Loan Services LLC (“Aurora”). The Indemnification Agreement is the subject of a separate lawsuit between SNMC, LBB, and Aurora. LBHI is not a party to that suit. LBHI seeks to preclude SNMC from raising certain defenses based on the Indemnification Agreement. SNMC seeks to preclude LBHI from re-litigating the rulings issued in the case related to the Indemnification Agreement. The Court has previously ruled that the Indemnification Agreement does not limit LBHI’s ability to bring claims under the LPA and the Seller’s Guide. 1 Based upon this previous ruling, the Court finds that the Indemnification Agreement is irrelevant to the issues to be decided by the jury in this case. Further, any limited probative value is substantially outweighed 1 Docket No. 91. 1 Dockets.Justia.com by the danger of confusing the issues, misleading the jury, and wasting time. 2 Therefore, the Court will exclude all evidence and argument concerning the Indemnification Agreement. The same analysis holds true for the rulings in the case related to the Indemnification Agreement. Those rulings will not be admitted and should not be discussed by either party. It is therefore ORDERED that LBHI’s Motion in Limine No. 3 (Docket No. 159) is GRANTED. It is further ORDERED that SNMC’s Motion in Limine No. 3 (Docket No. 162) is DENIED. DATED this 8th day of December, 2016. BY THE COURT: Ted Stewart United States District Judge 2 Fed. R. Evid. 402, 403. 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.