In a recent decision in the case of Horst v. Union Carbide Corporation, No.
15-CV-1903 (C.P. Lacka. Co. Oct. 11, 2017 Nealon, J.), Judge Terrence R. Nealon
of the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas reviewed the scope of a trial
judge's authority to impose limitations upon the length and number of opening
statements, closing arguments, and examinations of witnesses pursuant to Pa.
R.C.P. 223 and 225.
This asbestos action was proceeding under allegations that
the Plaintiff allegedly developed malignant mesothelioma as a result of the
Plaintiff’s alleged exposure to asbestos-containing products that were
allegedly manufactured or sold by the Defendants while the Plaintiff was employed
by his father’s heating, ventilation, air conditioning, and plumbing
business.
The court noted that it had issued this Order imposing
limitations on the trial proceedings after counsel had initially represented to
the court that the trial of this matter would last three (3) weeks after which
the Defendants more recently revealed to the court that four (4) trial weeks or
twenty (20) days, would be required to present the Defendants' case only.
Accordingly, the court noted that, in order to ensure that
the trial would be completed within the allotted time that was originally fixed
based upon the initial representations of counsel, the court entered an Order
imposing limitations upon the length and number of the opening statements,
closing arguments, and examination of witnesses. In this decision, the court denies the
Motion for Reconsideration filed by eleven (11) of the twelve (12) Defendants
in which the Defendants requested that all of eleven (11) participating
Defendants be granted the opportunity through their respective counsel to
present opening statements, closing arguments, and to examine all non-expert
witnesses called by the Plaintiff.
After reviewing Pennsylvania law in support of its decision
and authority to limit certain aspects of trial proceedings, the trial court
granted in part and denied in part the Motion for Reconsideration. The Motion for Reconsideration was granted
to the extent that the prior Order of Court was amended to provide that all
Defendants shall be allotted and aggregated a period of 180 minutes within
which to present and conclude all opening statements on behalf of Defendants as
well as a same amount of time within which to complete closing arguments for
all Defendants. In all other respects,
the Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration was denied.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.