Foster v. United Continental Holdings, Inc.
- 3:19-cv-02530
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 6
Foster v. United Airlines sets jury-trial procedures and resolves several evidence motions; the judge is not clearly identified.
Nathaniel Foster, the other plaintiffs, United Airlines, Inc., the other defendants, their lawyers and witnesses, and the prospective jurors were affected by the trial schedule, evidentiary rulings, and courtroom procedures.
What happened
In Foster v. United Airlines, the court set a jury trial for August 7, 2023, and established limits on trial time, openings, closings, jury selection, witnesses, exhibits, objections, and COVID-related procedures.
The court ruled on several motions about what evidence the jury could hear. It granted in part one plaintiffs’ motion, denied or deferred several others, granted in principle two defendants’ motions, and stated that the text does not show a ruling on defendants’ motion in limine number 7.
The court also ordered the parties to revise and file proposed jury instructions by August 2, 2023. The judge’s name is not clearly readable in the supplied opinion text.
The detailed version
- Foster v. United Continental Holdings, Inc. · No. 3:19-cv-02530
- Aug. 1, 2023
Background
This pretrial order followed a July 27, 2023 conference. The court set a jury trial for August 7, 2023, at 9:00 a.m. It established a Monday-through-Thursday trial schedule, generally running from 9:00 a.m. until 2:00 or 2:30 p.m. Each side received 10 hours of trial time, excluding opening statements and closing arguments. Plaintiffs collectively and each defendant could have up to 30 minutes for opening statements and 60 minutes for closing arguments.
Trial procedures
The court ordered that nine jurors would be selected using a “strike and replace” method. It provided procedures for juror questionnaires, proposed voir dire questions, jury notebooks, witness photographs, exhibit binders, sidebars, objections, witness availability, and advance disclosure of witnesses and exhibits. Motions could not be filed during trial without the court’s prior approval. Witnesses generally had to testify live and in person in open court under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 43(a).
The order also established COVID-19 protocols. Certain courtroom team members could remain unmasked if they had completed a primary vaccine series and received at least one booster. Witnesses would not be masked while testifying, subject to procedures for witnesses who could not certify vaccination compliance. Jurors could decide individually whether to wear masks.
Plaintiffs’ motions in limine
A motion in limine is a request to decide before trial whether particular evidence may be presented to the jury.
- The motion concerning Nathaniel Foster’s personal marital matters was granted in part. Defendants could present evidence about plaintiffs’ preexisting emotional distress, but not the reasons for distress relating to marital issues.
- The motion concerning causes of NJ Foster’s brain injury was denied in principle. If defendants offered alternative causes, they had to establish an adequate foundation.
- The spoliation motion was denied. The court would not give an adverse-inference instruction, but plaintiffs could offer testimony that recordings of Pamela Foster’s calls to United’s accessibility desk were missing.
- The motion seeking to bar evidence that first responders were negligent was denied.
Defendants’ motions in limine
- The motion seeking to exclude evidence of other alleged incidents involving United was deferred to trial. Plaintiffs could present approximately three to seven proposed incidents, one full court day in advance, identifying the incident, the witness, and why the incident was substantially similar to this case. The order states that plaintiffs had not adequately justified admitting incidents occurring after February
- 2. The motion concerning certain conditions at Monroe Regional Airport was denied for the reason stated on the record.
- The motion concerning certain conduct by United was denied for the reason stated on the record.
- The motion concerning NJ Foster’s seat assignment on the Houston-to-Monroe flight was denied for the reason stated on the record.
- The motion seeking to exclude any suggestion that the Houston-to-Monroe flight had not been completed when the incident occurred was denied for the reason stated on the record.
- The motion concerning evidence that NJ Foster could experience conscious awareness, pain, responses to stimuli, or emotion was granted in principle. Plaintiffs could not contradict their own expert to the extent the expert had stated that NJ was in a persistent vegetative state, could not experience pain, or had no conscious awareness.
- The supplied text shows the heading for a motion concerning alleged improper conduct before the incident, but it does not show the motion’s disposition.
- The motion concerning bystander plaintiffs’ emotional distress was granted in principle. For purposes of the bystander claims, the relevant distress was limited to distress from witnessing the February 2019 incident at the airport.
Jury instructions and disposition
The court instructed the parties to revise and separately file preliminary and final jury instructions by noon on August 2, 2023, using applicable model instructions as much as possible. The court ordered the parties to provide source notes and Microsoft Word versions by email, and allowed them to comment on the final instructions before they were read to the jury.
This order set trial procedures and ruled on evidentiary motions; it did not decide the parties’ underlying claims. The supplied signature does not clearly identify the judge by name.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.