Nadeau v. Hunter Lawn Care, LLC

• Decision Date: 10 February 2022
• Docket Number: Civil Action No. 20-cv-11167-ADB
• Citation: 585 F.Supp.3d 158
• Parties: Paul NADEAU, et al., Plaintiffs, v. HUNTER LAWN CARE, LLC, Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts

585 F.Supp.3d 158

Paul NADEAU, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
HUNTER LAWN CARE, LLC, Defendant.

Civil Action No. 20-cv-11167-ADB

United States District Court, D. Massachusetts.

Signed February 10, 2022

585 F.Supp.3d 159

Amato Anthony DeLuca, Katelyn Revens, Pro Hac Vice, Katelyn M. Revens, Richard A. Boren, DeLuca & Weizenbaum Ltd., Providence, RI, for Plaintiffs.

John B. Stewart, Murphy & Manitsas, LLP, Springfield, MA, for Defendant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS IN LIMINE

BURROUGHS, D.J.

Plaintiff Paul Nadeau ("Plaintiff") filed this personal injury lawsuit against Defendant Hunter Lawn Care, LLC ("Defendant"), alleging that he suffered serious injuries after he slipped and fell in the parking lot of his employer, Future Foam. [ECF Nos. 17, 61]. Plaintiff claims that his accident was caused by Defendant's failure to properly clear the parking lot of snow and ice. [ECF No. 17].

Currently before the Court are Plaintiff's six motions in limine. [ECF Nos. 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53]. For the reasons set forth below, ECF Nos. 48, 50, 51, and 52 are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. ECF No. 49 is GRANTED as unopposed. ECF No. 53 is DENIED with leave to renew as appropriate at trial.

I. DISCUSSION

The Court assumes the parties' familiarity with the factual allegations contained in Plaintiff's amended complaint, [ECF No. 17], and the parties' pretrial memorandum, [ECF No. 61]. In short, Plaintiff contends that at all relevant times Future Foam contracted with Defendant for snow removal services. [ECF No. 61 at 1–4]. On December 5, 2019, Plaintiff fell and fractured his right ankle allegedly due to Defendant's failure to properly clear Future Foam's parking lot of snow and ice as required by its contract with Future Foam. [ECF No. 61 at 1–4]. Defendant disputes this account. [Id. at 4–5]. The parties do agree, however, that, as a result of his injury, Plaintiff was out of work from December 5, 2019 through June 29, 2020 and he has incurred medical expenses of $48,385.19. [Id. at 5]. Plaintiff is seeking damages for medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering. [Id. at 4]. His

585 F.Supp.3d 160

minor son is seeking damages for loss of consortium, society, and companionship. [Id. ].

A. ECF No. 48: Motion In Limine Regarding The Subsequent Contract Between Defendant And Future Foam

Plaintiff asks the Court to preclude any evidence regarding Future Foam's renewal of its snow removal contract with Defendant because such evidence is irrelevant and prejudicial. [ECF No. 48 at 1–2]. Plaintiff acknowledges that Future Foam continued to contract with Defendant but contends that any discussion of contract renewals may improperly allow the inference that Defendant is not liable or negligent. [Id. at 2]. Defendant argues that this evidence is relevant because it speaks to whether Future Foam was satisfied with Defendant's services and thought that Defendant performed as required under its contract. [ECF No. 56 at 1–2].

Under Federal Rule of Evidence 401 "[e]vidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable" and "the fact is of consequence in...