Bryson et al v. Rough Country, LLC
| Georgia Northern District Court | |
| Judge: | Richard W Story |
| Case #: | 2:22-cv-00017 |
| Nature of Suit | 355 Torts - Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle Product Liability |
| Cause | 28:1332 Diversity-Wrongful Death |
| Case Filed: | Feb 01, 2022 |
| Last checked: Sunday Jul 31, 2022 4:47 AM EDT |
|
Defendant
Rough Country, LLC
|
Represented By
|
|
Plaintiff
Joshua Bryson
|
Represented By
|
|
Plaintiff
Santana Bryson
|
Represented By
|
| Docket last updated: 12 hours ago |
| Tuesday, April 01, 2025 | ||
|
notice
Notice setting Trial
Tue 04/01 4:10 PM
NOTICE setting Trial: Bench Trial set for 8/4/2025 at 09:00 AM in GAINESVILLE Courtroom 303 before Judge Richard W. Story. (sk) |
||
| Monday, March 31, 2025 | ||
| 196 | 196
30+
pgs
order
Order on Motion to Exclude Order on Motion to Strike Order on Motion in Limine
Mon 03/31 4:35 PM
ORDER ruling on the respective Evidentiary Motions following the the oral arguments hearing at the March 24, 2024 Pretrial Conference. The Parties have withdrawn several outstanding Motions, and those Motions [Dkt. 145; Dkt. 146(1)(3), (5)(6), (8), (11), (15)(19); Dkt. 156(3)(4), (6), (9)(10), (12)(14), (16)(19)] are therefore DENIED as moot. The Court DENIES Defendant's Motion [Dkt. 140] because the Court cannotat this timedetermine that evidence regarding the prior version of O.C.G.A. § 40-8-6 carries absolutely no probative value, will waste time, or amounts to cumulative evidence. Plaintiffs may offer the evidence subject to objection at trial. Considering the Parties' arguments and representations at the Pretrial Conference, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendant's Motion141 . It is GRANTED as to evidence of Santana Bryson's premature delivery of her newborn baby. It is DENIED as to the comparison of C.Z.B.'s fatal injury and Plaintiffs' less severe injuries. The Court agrees with Plaintiffs and accordingly DENIES Defendant's Motion [Dkt. 142] for a lack of specificity. The Court DENIES Defendant's Motion [Dkt. 143] and LIMITS the use of evidence regarding prior lawsuits to Defendant's notice of accidents involving Defendant's lift kits. The Court DENIES Defendant's Motion [Dkt. 144] because the Court cannotat this timedetermine FARS evidence carries absolutely no probative value, will waste time, or amounts to cumulative evidence. Accordingly, Plaintiffs may offer the evidence subject to objection at trial. While Defendant originally included 19 subsections in its Omnibus Motion in Limine [Dkt. 146], all but one subsection has been resolved via stipulation or withdrawal. In the remaining subsection, Defendant argues that any evidence describing how Plaintiffs' injury has impacted friends or family should be excluded, as it would "improperly solicit sympathy from the jury." [Dkt. 146, at 1415]. Plaintiffs respond that this portion of the Motion is "overly broad and vague." [Dkt. 174, at 13]. The Court agrees with Plaintiffs and accordingly DENIES this portion of Defendant's Motion [Dkt. 146(12)] for a lack of specificity. The Court agrees with Defendant and accordingly DENIES Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine [Dkt. 154] for a lack of specificity. Consistent with the Court's ruling on Defendant's Motions regarding the same evidence [Dkt. 140; Dkt. 143], the Court GRANTS in part Plaintiffs' Motion [Dkt. 155]. It is GRANTED in part as to evidence of prior lawsuits, as Plaintiffs may introduce that evidence for the limited purpose of showing notice. It is also GRANTED as to witness testimony on O.C.G.A. § 40-8-6, subject to Defendant's objections at trial. The Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Plaintiffs' Omnibus Motions in Limine [Dkt 156]. (See for for subsection specifics) Plaintiff's Motion in Limine [Dkt. 155] is GRANTED in part. The Court DENIES Plaintiffs' Motion [Dkt. 115]. The Court DENIES Defendant's Motion [Dkt. 137]. The Court DENIES Defendant's Motion [Dkt. 138]. The Court DENIES Defendant's Motion [Dkt. 139]. The Court DENIES Plaintiffs' Motion [Dkt. 147]. The Court DENIES Plaintiffs' Motion [Dkt. 150] because Plaintiffs will be provided an opportunity to cross- examine Mr. Grimes during the Court's bench trial. As discussed earlier, this ruling does not prevent Plaintiffs from challenging this evidence at trial. The Court DENIES Plaintiffs' Motion [Dkt. 151]. The Court DENIES Plaintiffs' Motion [Dkt. 152]. The Court DENIES Plaintiffs' Motion [Dkt. 153] for a lack of specificity. The Court GRANTS Plaintiffs' Motion [Dkt. 116]. The Court GRANTS Defendant's Motion [Dkt. 118]. The Court DENIES Defendant's Motion [Dkt. 119]. Signed by Judge Richard W. Story on 03/31/2025. (ddm) |
|
| Friday, March 28, 2025 | ||
| 195 | 195
notice
Notice to Take Deposition
Fri 03/28 1:31 PM
Amended NOTICE to Take Deposition of Patrick Just filed by Joshua Bryson, Santana Bryson (Cannella, Tedra) |
|
| 194 | 194
notice
Notice to Take Deposition
Fri 03/28 1:27 PM
Amended NOTICE to Take Deposition of Ken Dunn filed by Joshua Bryson, Santana Bryson (Cannella, Tedra) |
|
| Wednesday, March 26, 2025 | ||
| 193 | 193
misc
Transcript
Wed 03/26 7:54 PM
TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings held on March 24, 2025, before Judge Richard W. Story. Court Reporter/Transcriber Denise Stewart. A full directory of court reporters and their contact information can be found at www.gand.uscourts.gov/court-reporter-directory. Tape Number: 1. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Redaction Request due 4/16/2025. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 4/28/2025. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 6/24/2025. (dms) |
|
|
Att: 1
Appendix Notice of Filing Transcript
|
||