Zavislak

Zavislak v. Netflix, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 29, 20235:21-cv-01811California3,053 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 MARK ZAVISLAK, Case No. 5:21-cv-01811-EJD

Plaintiff, ORDER RE MOTIONS IN LIMINE

v. 10 Re: ECF Nos. 209, 210, 211, 212 NETFLIX, INC., Defendant.

Presently before the Court are Defendant Netflix Inc.’s (“Netflix) motions in limine (“MIL”) to exclude or admit certain evidence from trial. ECF Nos. 209, 210, 211, 212. Having considered the parties’ briefing, the Court rules on Netflix’s MILs as discussed below. I. DISCUSSION A. Netflix’s MIL to Exclude Hearsay Statements Netflix moves to exclude statements made by an unnamed Collective Health customer service representative and Zavislak’s statement about his physician’s prescription as inadmissible hearsay. Def.’s MIL No. 1, ECF No. 209. Plaintiff’s declaration accompanying his motion for summary judgment includes a statement made by an anonymous Collective Health customer service representative who

1 A 3-day bench trial was…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.