Talk:Motion in limine

Comment
There should also be a note that a motion in limine is used to get a ruling to allow for the inclusion of evidence, not only to get a ruling as to whether or not evidence will be precluded from trial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.154.183.41 (talk) 11:50, July 25, 2006‎ (UTC)

Adding and Widening the definition
I corrected the original article as it contained "during a trial" which is against the Latin definition of the word 'Limine" meaning "threshold" defined as 'before going through' or 'begining' as we understand 'threshold', as with a doorway, translated. Having just worked with this type of motion in court, I found this article while researching, spoke with several lawyers, then changed the page siting the external reference as well. Comments welcome. cpswarrior 05:09, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Corrected as to motion during a trial, widened definition i.e., civil and criminal use also State and Federal use. A Motion in limine can be proposed before the trial, at a pre-trial hearing and "during the trial". It is never presented in front of the jury, as you stated before, as doing that would deny the very purpose of the motion.  It also has many other uses than the one example given, though that is an important one.  Another important reason for the motion is an attempt to include or exclude presentation of highly sensitive testimony i.e., "exceptions" to heresay rules under the "excited utterances" or "dying declaration rule" - Definitely two examples the State usually wants in and the Defense usually wants excluded by judge before jury gets to hear it.  Many civil uses as well. Mugginsx (talk) 23:51, 20 October 2011 (UTC)


 * corrected above some spelling errors and added some punctuation and usage not affecting context.   Jupiter71   (talk)     21:44, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I corrected recent change in the article
There is nothing in legal terminology that I know of that is just "in limine". It is always a "Motion in limine". As this is an article as to the legal definition, I do not believe it is appropriate to define it as simply "in limine" anywhere in this article. Mugginsx (talk) 18:36, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Kept in your positioning of the italics in the lead since you are describing definition of in limine. Took it out in paragraphs referring ONLY to the legal Motions.  I have typed these kinds of motions and they are never are shown as Motions in Limine.  They are ALWAYS entitled Motions in limine.  You can change it at the top for describing what in limine means but when you are talking exclusively about the legal document its title is all together:  Motion in Limine. Mugginsx (talk) 11:32, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * In limine is a Latin term. As per our manual of style, foreign-language terms are emphasised with italics, which is what the '' markup is for, not a quotation mark.
 * Wikipedia prefers italics for phrases in other languages and for isolated foreign words that do not yet have everyday use in non-specialised English. Use the native spellings if they use the Latin alphabet (with or without diacritics)—otherwise Anglicise their spelling. For example: "Gustav I of Sweden liked to breakfast on crisp bread (knäckebröd) open sandwiches with toppings such as messmör (butter made from goat's milk), ham (skinka), vegetables (grönsaker) like tomatoes (tomat) or cucumber (gurka)." In accordance with the guide to writing better Wikipedia articles, use foreign words sparingly.
 * Writ of habeas corpus or quo warranto are both good examples where we italicise the Latin throughout. Hope that explains it. -  Chrism  would like to hear from you 16:16, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, if you say so. It just looks funny to me expressed that way as a legal term.  My point was that when I actually created the document in my work entitled Motion in limine I did not do it that way, but since this is a Wiki document and not the actual legal document let's go with the Wiki guideline you mentioned. Mugginsx (talk) 17:05, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Is this USA only
The definition only refers to "State or Federal level". This sounds like it is a USA only legal term. This should be more explicit, yes or no. cerddaf 04:09, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

What is the intended verb of the dependent clause (protasis) ?
"This tactic can be especially useful if the admissibility of certain evidence critical to proposing doubt for the opposing party's case." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:376D:9730:255A:6263:5E38:FFC6 (talk) 17:24, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

I would say "regards". Thus "This tactic can be especially useful if the motion regards the admissibility of certain evidence critical to proposing doubt for the opposing party's case." Terry Thorgaard (talk) 20:29, 5 November 2014 (UTC)