In re Sedgwick LLP
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 SAN JOSE DIVISION 6 7 JAMES GANSMAN, Case No. 23-cv-03667-BLF
8 Plaintiff,
ORDER RE: MOTIONS IN LIMINE
9 v. [Re: ECF No. 13, 21, 22] 10 MICHAEL A. TANENBAUM, et al., 11 Defendants. 12 JAMES GANSMAN, Case No. 23-cv-03671-BLF 13 Plaintiff, 14 v.
15 JAMES KEALE, 16 Defendant.
17 On February 15, 2024, the Court held a pretrial conference in this action, during which it 18 issued oral rulings on Plaintiff James Gansman’s and Defendants Michael A. Tanenbaum and 19 James Keale’s motions in limine. The Court here expands upon those oral rulings. 20 I. DISCUSSION 21 A. Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 1 to Exclude Defendant’s Expert, D. Paul Regan, from Providing Expert Testimony Pursuant to Fed. R. Evid 702 (ECF 22 No. 21) 23 Plaintiff argues that Defendants’ insolvency expert, D. Paul Regan, should be precluded 24 from giving expert opinion testimony regarding Sedgwick LLP’s date of…