In the case of Koch v. Musser, No. 17-613 (C.P. Lycoming Co. Sept. 1, 2019 Linhardt, J.), the court granted in part and denied in part a Plaintiff’s Motion In Limine to preclude a Defendant from offering any evidence of his chronic marijuana use in a civil litigation matter.
The court sustained the motion and precluded the evidence relative to the Plaintiff’s alleged use of marijuana on the date of the incident.
However, the court did find that the Plaintiff’s alleged chronic use of marijuana was relevant and admissible to the issues of his future earning capacity. The court noted that deposition testimony had established that the Plaintiff had lost employment and had difficulty obtaining and maintaining employment due to his chronic marijuana use. It is also noted that his chronic marijuana use could also bar him from certain future employment opportunities.
As such, the court found that the evidence of the Plaintiff’s marijuana use was sufficiently probative on the question of his future earnings so as to be admissible.
However, the court held that it would exclude the evidence of the Plaintiff’s chronic marijuana use as a fact relevant to his future life expectancy unless expert medical testimony was provided in that regard.
Anyone wishing to review a copy of this decision may click this LINK.
Source: “Digest of Recent Opinions.” Pennsylvania Law Weekly (Nov. 12, 2019).