CHAPTER 3.II. Sample Motions

• Jurisdiction: United States

II. Sample Motions

A. Motion to Exclude Irrelevant Evidence

NO.__________

__________

v.

__________

IN THE DISTRICT COURT

__________ JUDICIAL COURT

__________ COUNTY, TEXAS

Motion to Exclude Irrelevant Evidence

Comes now___, Plaintiff in this cause, and file this, his Motion to Exclude Irrelevant Evidence, and in support thereof, Plaintiff would show the Court the following:

1.FACTUAL BACKGROUND

This is a personal injury action arising out of an automobile versus bicycle accident that occurred on January 15, 2019, in which the Plaintiff incurred a broken left clavicle and two broken ribs. Plaintiff has indicated that he will not be making a claim for recovery of past or future lost earnings. This motion seeks to preclude the Defendant from attempting to present prejudicial and irrelevant evidence relating to the Plaintiff's immigration status at the time of trial.

2.PLAINTIFF'S IMMIGRATION STATUS IS NOT RELEVANT TO ANY MATERIAL ISSUE IN THIS CASE

Texas Rule of Evidence 402 states that "evidence which is not relevant is inadmissible." Relevant evidence is defined by Texas Rule of Evidence 401 as "having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence." See Torrington v. Stutzman, 46 S.W.3d 829, 845 (Tex. 2000). Irrelevant evidence is not admissible. Morale v. State, 557 S.W.3d 569, 573 (Tex. 2018); Diamond Offshore Services Ltd. v. Williams, 542 S.W.3d 539, 549 (Tex. 2018).

Evidence may be properly excluded where not relevant to matters at issue. See Morale v. State, 557 S.W.3d 569, 573 (Tex. 2018). Plaintiff's immigration or residence status is not relevant to the issues in the case. See TXI Transp. Co. v. Hughes, 306 S.W.3d 230, 234 (Tex. 2010); Zamarron v. Adame, 864 S.W.2d 173, 175 (Tex. App.—El Paso 1993...