Free Motion in Limine - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Mary H. Beard Admitted Pro Hac Vice FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION 3620 Hacks Cross Road, Building B-3rd Floor Memphis, TN 38125 Telephone: (901) 434-8061 Facsimile: (901) 434-9279 Email: [email protected] FENNEMORE CRAIG, P.C. Lori A. Higuera (No. 017273) Alec R. Hillbo (No. 020185) 3003 North Central Avenue Suite 2600 Phoenix, AZ 85012-2913 Telephone: (602) 916-5000 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Attorneys for Defendant Federal Express Corporation UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA SEAN L. HARGROW, Plaintiff, v. FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation; JOHN and JANE DOES IX; BLACK CORPORATION I-X; WHITE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANIES I-X, Defendants. DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE OF PLAINTIFF'S PSYCHOLOGICAL INJURY OR EMOTIONAL DISTRESS CLAIM No. 03-0642 PHX DGC

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Ariz. 113 (Ariz. App. 1990. Defendant respectfully requests that the Court issue an order Defendant Federal Express Corporation ("FedEx"), by and through counsel, hereby submits its Motion in Limine to exclude evidence regarding Plaintiff's alleged psychological injury as any damages for such injury are exclusively compensable under Arizona Workers' Compensation Statute. Irvin Investors, Inc. v. Superior Court, 166

Case 2:03-cv-00642-DGC

Document 126

Filed 11/02/2006

Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

in limine precluding any mention by Plaintiff, Plaintiff's counsel, and Plaintiff's witnesses of this evidence during trial. In the instant case, Plaintiff may attempt to introduce testimony or evidence regarding his alleged psychological injury after his discharge from Federal Express. Defendant submits that this Court should exclude evidence regarding Plaintiff's alleged injury on the grounds that his claims for emotional distress or psychological damages are exclusively compensable under the Arizona Workers' Compensation Statute. Like the Plaintiff in Irvin, Plaintiff cannot prove in any way that FedEx acted intentionally or in reckless disregard that emotional distress would result from its actions. See Irvin, 166 Ariz. at 114. Moreover, as the employer had no knowledge of the supervisor's misconduct in Irvin, FedEx lacked knowledge that Plaintiff felt that Ms. Montgomery retaliated against him as he never made such complaint during his employment. Plaintiff could have file a complaint through FedEx's Guaranteed Fair Treatment Process. See Irvin, 166 Ariz. at 116. As such, any evidence regarding Plaintiff's alleged psychological or emotional distress injury should be barred as the Arizona Workers' Compensation Statute is the exclusive remedy. DATED this 2nd day of November, 2006.

Case 2:03-cv-00642-DGC

- 2 Document 126

Filed 11/02/2006

Page 2 of 3

1 Respectfully submitted, 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Case 2:03-cv-00642-DGC - 3 Document 126 Filed 11/02/2006 Page 3 of 3
621301

By: /s/ Mary H. Beard Mary H. Beard FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION and Lori A. Higuera Alec R. Hillbo FENNEMORE CRAIG, P.C. Attorneys for Defendant Federal Express Corporation

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on February 16, 2006, I electronically transmitted the attached document to the Clerk's Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants: Mishka L. Marshall Marshall Law Group, P.C. 777 East Thomas Road, Suite 210 Phoenix, AZ 85014

/s/ Mary H. Beard Mary H. Beard