GOSSETT v. JIUDICY INC

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
VALDOSTA DIVISION
SUSAN GOSSETT, 	:
:
Plaintiff, 	:
:
v. 	: 	CASE NO.: 7:24-CV-00067 (WLS)
:
JIUDICY INC d/b/a 	:
LABOR FINDERS, 	:
:
Defendant. 	:
:
:
ORDER
The Court held a pretrial conference in the above-captioned matter on July 15, 2026.
This Order memorializes that conference.
First, the Court inquired about the status of the designations of deposition testimony
and memoranda in opposition filed by both Parties. (Docs. 30, 31, 32, & 33). The Parties
indicated that all issues regarding witness availability and use of deposition testimony at trial
had been resolved.
Second, the Court discussed the pending Motions in Limine. (Docs. 40 & 41). The true
purpose of a motion in limine is to avoid the introduction of evidence at trial that is “clearly
inadmissible on all potential grounds” and could irretrievably impact the fairness of trial. Royal
Marco Point 1 Condo. Ass’n v. QBE Ins., No. 2:07-cv-16, 2011 WL 470651, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Feb.
2, 2011) (citing Luce v. United States, 469 U.S. 38, 41 (1984)). But the context at trial often
determines the admissibility of evidence and, for this reason, “i[n] limine rulings to admit or
exclude evidence are always preliminary and conditioned on what the evidence shows at trial.”
Ohler v. United States, 529 U.S. 753, 757 n.3 (2000). Furthermore, a trial court can promptly
instruct a jury to disregard improper testimony or inadmissible evidence, and “[i]n many such
cases the jury can and will follow the trial judge’s instructions to disregard such information.”
United States v. Astling, 733 F.2d 1446, 1455 (11th Cir. 1984); United States v. Fuentes, 521 F.
App’x 911, 911 (11th Cir. 2013). A motion in limine ruling has no impact on counsel’s duty to
Case 7:24-cv-00067-WLS Document 43 Filed 07/15/26 Page 1 of 2

2
make proper and contemporaneous objections at trial as to any evidence or argument they
consider inadmissible or improper. See Cephus v. CSX Transp., Inc., 771 F. App’x 883, 894–95
(11th Cir. 2019). Accordingly, the Court ORDERED the Parties to file any Response to the
pending Motions in Limine by no later than Monday, July 20, 2026.
Third, the Court scheduled the trial to begin Monday, August 3, 2026.
SO ORDERED, this 15th day of July 2026.
/s/ W. Louis Sands_____
W. LOUIS SANDS, SR. JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Case 7:24-cv-00067-WLS Document 43 Filed 07/15/26 Page 2 of 2