Spurlock v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company

7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE CRAIG SPURLOCK, No. 2:23-cv-00467-JHC Plaintiff, 11 SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER RE: v. MOTIONS IN LIMINE STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Defendant.

16 This matter comes before the Court on the parties’ motions in limine. Dkt. ## 76 & 77. Upon further consideration, including review of the parties supplemental briefing, Dkt.

18 ## 94 & 98, the Court rules as follows: • Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine 21: GRANTED to the extent that David Mandt may not testify that State Farm was reasonable or acted reasonably. See United States Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Ulbricht, 576 F. Supp. 3d 850, 858 (W.D. Wash. 2021). • Defendant’s Motion in Limine M: GRANTED.

26 With respect to each remaining motion in limine on which ruling has been SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER RE: || reserved, the Court will address the issue if it arises. If a party seeks to refer to any || information or material covered by any such motion on which the Court has reserved || ruling, that party shall first raise the issue with the Court outside the presence of the || jury.

5 DATED this 6th day of January, 2024.

7 CL 4. (7 Aut 8 JOHN H. CHUN 9 United States District Judge SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER RE: MOTIONS IN LIMINE - 2 NO. 2:23-cv-00467-JHC