Pursuant to the Uniform Pretrial Order, such a motion must be duly noticed and heard prior to trial if it exceeds five minutes.
If you suspect your opponent may attempt to disclose collateral source payments in the presence of the jury, a motion in limine should be filed. The motion should seek a court order barring your opponent from any mention of collateral sources in the presence of the jury.
A motion in limine is also an appropriate remedy available to a party who seeks a sanction for an opponent’s failure to supplement in a prompt manner. The motion in limine will seek a court order preventing or limiting the opponent’s use of information affected by a failure to supplement promptly. For example, the Uniform Pretrial Order imposes deadlines for providing all information discoverable under Rule 4:1(b)(4)(A)(1) pertaining to the opinions of expert witnesses. The sanction for late disclosure of opinions (and facts supporting the opinions) can be argued in a motion in limine, and should include a request for an order excluding the new opinions. Rule 4:12(b)(2)(B) & 4:12(d)(2), and FRCP 37(c)(1). Where a party does not disclose the opinions (and facts supporting the opinions) of its experts in a timely manner, the trial court will exclude the testimony. Kirk Timber & Farming Co. v Union Camp Corp., 2001 WL 920837 (Va. Cir. Ct.) (August 15, 2001.) citing, City of Hopewell v County of Prince George, 240 Va. 306, 314, 397 S.E.2d 793, 797 (1990). Likewise, the failure of a party to supplement an interrogatory or request for production in a prompt manner can also cause prejudice and adversely affect trial preparation. When such occurs, a motion in limine can request an order excluding the information not disclosed promptly. If exclusion of evidence is not an appropriate remedy, such as where there is evidence of nondisclosure or spoliation, the motion can request other relief, such an order establishing liability or an inference favorable to the aggrieved party.