Deborah Heller v. Hillstone Restaurant Group, Inc.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana denied the remaining portions of Hillstone Restaurant Group, Inc.'s motion in limine in Deborah Heller's premises-liability action. The court held that testimony concerning statements allegedly made by a Hillstone employee after the accident was admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(D) and relevant to notice and creation of the hazard. The court also held that expert testimony concerning alleged dips or “bellies” in the restaurant's sewer line was relevant to constructive notice and admissible.

Holdings

1. The proffered testimony was admissible at the motion-in-limine stage because the evidence sufficiently supported that the declarant was a Hillstone employee speaking about a matter within the scope of the employment relationship. The statements were relevant to whether Hillstone created or had constructive notice of a sewage-system hazard and were not subject to exclusion under Rule 403.
2. Evidence and expert testimony concerning alleged “bellies” in the restaurant's sewer or sanitary line were relevant and admissible because they could assist the jury in determining whether Hillstone created or had actual or constructive notice of the hazardous sewage condition. The probative value was not substantially outweighed by the dangers identified in Rule 403.

Questions Presented

1. Whether testimony by Daniel Morris concerning statements allegedly made by a Hillstone employee immediately after Heller's fall should be excluded as hearsay, irrelevant, or unfairly prejudicial.
2. Whether testimony and evidence concerning alleged dips or “bellies” in the restaurant's sewer or sanitary line, and alleged violations of plumbing standards, should be excluded as irrelevant, unfairly prejudicial, confusing, misleading, or inadmissible expert testimony.

Disposition

denied