Motion in Limine
A motion in limine is a pretrial request asking the court to rule on the admissibility of specific evidence before it is presented at trial. The goal is to prevent the jury from hearing evidence that the moving party believes is improper — and to avoid the prejudice that comes from a jury hearing something it is then told to disregard.
What It Is
Trials proceed under rules of evidence that determine what a jury can and cannot hear. Hearsay, unfairly prejudicial prior acts, expert testimony that lacks adequate scientific foundation — all of these categories of evidence are potentially excludable. But the formal mechanism for exclusion matters.
If a party objects at trial when improper evidence is offered, the jury hears the question before it hears the ruling. Even when the judge sustains the objection and instructs the jury to disregard the answer, the damage may be done. A motion in limine solves this problem preemptively: the court rules on admissibility before the trial begins, so excluded evidence never reaches the jury at all.
Motions in limine are filed in the weeks before trial and heard at pretrial conferences. Both parties typically file multiple motions — the defense seeking to exclude damaging prosecution evidence, the plaintiff seeking to exclude defense evidence. Judges may rule definitively (“this evidence is excluded”), conditionally (“this evidence is excluded unless X foundation is laid”), or defer (“I’ll rule when the evidence is offered in context”).
A ruling granting a motion in limine is not necessarily final. If circumstances change during trial — a witness opens the door to excluded testimony, or a party introduces something that makes previously excluded evidence relevant — the court may revisit its ruling.
Etymology
In limine is Latin for “at the threshold” or “at the beginning.” The motion literally occurs at the threshold of the trial, before evidence is presented. The term entered legal usage through the Latin heritage of common law procedure, where Latin phrases remained standard in formal pleadings well into the modern era.
A Concrete Example
In a civil suit arising from a car accident, the defendant seeks to exclude evidence that he had three prior DUI convictions. The plaintiff argues the convictions are relevant to recklessness; the defendant argues they are unfairly prejudicial and not admissible under the applicable evidence rules. The court rules on the motion in limine before trial begins. If excluded, the jury never hears about the prior convictions. If admitted, the plaintiff can introduce them through proper witness testimony without risk of a mid-trial objection derailing the presentation.
Common Misconception
A motion in limine is not an appeal or a challenge to the case itself. It does not challenge the sufficiency of the claims or defenses. It is solely about what evidence the jury will and will not be permitted to hear. A successful motion in limine that excludes key evidence can effectively decide the case’s outcome — if the excluded evidence was central to a party’s theory — but it does so indirectly, by shaping what the jury knows, not by ruling on the merits.