Faulkner v. Lucille Packard Salter Children's Hospital

Background

The defendant, Lucile Packard Salter Children's Hospital (LPCH), filed seven motions in limine, which are pretrial requests to limit evidence or testimony at trial. This order resolved Motions in Limine Nos. 1 and 5. Trial was scheduled to begin on February 1, 2023.

Motion No. 1 sought to exclude witnesses and documents that the defendant said had not been disclosed. The court granted the motion as to Rick Majzun and denied it as to the balance of the motion. The court did not exclude the remaining three witnesses identified in the motion—Christy Sandborg, M.D.; David Stevenson, M.D.; and Sarah Wallace—because LPCH was sufficiently on notice that they might be potential witnesses. The court also did not exclude two financial witnesses or four financial exhibits, which would be used only if the trial reached the punitive-damages phase. The parties were ordered to meet and confer about the appropriate witness to verify the financial documents.

Motion No. 5 sought to exclude James W. Potts, J.D., whom Faulkner offered as a human-resources expert. LPCH argued that Potts's report contained no clear opinions, would not help the jury, was not based on sufficient facts or data, and could cause confusion and wasted time. Faulkner argued that LPCH had withheld relevant human-resources policies and offered to make Potts available for another deposition.

Analysis

The court applied Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and the related standards governing expert testimony. Those standards require the judge to screen expert testimony for reliability and usefulness, while leaving the testimony's weight to the jury once it clears that threshold.

The court found Potts's initial report inadequate. The report summarized employment laws and general human-resources standards but did not connect those standards to LPCH's conduct, policies, or practices in this case. The report also stated that it was not intended to give an opinion about the defendant's specific actions or failures to act. The court concluded that the proposed testimony would not assist the jury because it did not address matters beyond ordinary juror understanding in a useful, case-specific way.

The court agreed that LPCH should have produced two additional policies: the LPCH 2011 Code of Conduct and the Code of Professional Behavior of Medical Staff and Physicians-in-Training Policy. But it found that the failure to produce them was harmless under the specific circumstances. In particular, Potts had not reviewed even the LPCH policies that had already been produced, and his report was extremely general regarding the medical-whistleblowing claims remaining in the case. The court also rejected the argument that Potts should be allowed to supplement his report shortly before trial.

Disposition

The court granted Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 1 as to Rick Majzun and denied it as to the balance of the motion. The court granted Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 5 to exclude James W. Potts, J.D. The order was signed by Judge Susan Illston on January 24, 2023.