Chapter 2 - § 2.5 • EFFECT

• Jurisdiction: Colorado

§ 2.5 • EFFECT

Colorado

➢ New Trial. For a violation of an in limine order to serve as a basis for a new trial, the order must be clearly violated and the violation sufficiently prejudicial as to require reversal. Absent reference to the specific details of the excluded evidence, a near violation of an in limine order is not sufficiently prejudicial to warrant reversal. Van Shaack v. Van Shaack Holdings, Ltd., 856 P.2d 15, 24 (Colo. App. 1992), aff'd, 867 P.2d 892 (Colo. 1994); see also Halliburton v. Public Service Co., 804 P.2d 213, 218 (Colo. App. 1990).

➢ Condemnation Proceeding. Although a trial judge who is overseeing a commission hearing on compensation for a condemnation need not affirmatively grant or deny a motion in limine to exclude evidence, if the judge does issue an explicit ruling, then the commission is bound by that ruling and may not deviate from it. Reg'l Transp. Dist. v. 750 West 48th Ave., LLC, 357 P.3d 179 (Colo. 2015).

➢ Lack of Prejudice. Physician was not prejudiced by inclusion in attorney general's exceptions in response to physician's exceptions in disciplinary hearing of reference to instance in which physician assisted in surgery while in hypoglycemic state, which should have been excluded pursuant to physician's motion in limine. Reversal of revocation of physician's license was not required by this inclusion where Board, in reaching its decision, had before it the administrative law judge's exhaustive 20-page written decision that fully discussed minimal relevance of improperly admitted evidence and reasons for excluding it. Colorado State Bd. of Med. Exam'rs v. Hoffner, 832 P.2d 1062 (Colo. App. 1992).

➢ Lack of Objection. Computer-generated videotape animation of the type of injuries generated by shaking a baby was properly authenticated in prosecution for criminally negligent child abuse, where

...