opinion on the standard of care. Dr. Schlidt is not named as an
expert by either party. He may not therefore offer any opinion.
Motion 14 seeks to bar evidence that Ms. Kuhn and her family
have collateral sources of income. Ms. Kuhn explains that her claim
is based entirely on the loss of her husband’s companionship, not

on the loss of his income. I agree. Motion 14 is GranteD.

ENTER ORDER:

Lhe 0 Buhl

Elaine E. Bucklo
United States District Judge

Dated: March 25, 2003



~ Minute Order Form (06/97)

United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois
Name of Assigned Judge i Sitting Judge if Other
or Magistrate Judge Elaine E. Bucklo than Assigned Judge
CASE NUMBER 01 C 4092 DATE 3/25/2003
CASE Kuhn vs. United States of America
TITLE
[In the following box (a) indicate the party filing the motion, e.g., plaintiff, defendant, 3rd party plaintiff, and (b) state briefly the nature
MOTION: of the motion being presented.]
DOCKET ENTRY:
qi) Oo Filed motion of [ use listing in “Motion” box above.]
(2) Oo Brief in support of motion due
(3) oO Answer brief to motion due. . Reply to answer brief due. .
(4) a Ruling/Hearing on set for at
(5) Oo Status hearing[held/continued to] [set for/re-set for] on set for at
(()) Oo Pretrial conference[held/continued to] [set for/re-set for] on set for at
(7) oO Trial[set for/re-set for] on at
(8) oO (Bench/Jury trial] [Hearing] held/continued to at
(9) oO This case is dismissed [with/without] prejudice and without costs[by/agreement/pursuant to]
OOFRCP4(m) (OlLocal Rule 41.1 COFRCP41(a)(1) 0 FRCP41(a)(2).
ao [Other docket entry] Enter Memorandum Opinion and Order granting as unopposed motions in
limine numbers 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 and 12. The remaining motions in limine are granted in part and denied
in part. -
(11) [For further detail see order attached to the original minute order.}
No notices required, advised In open court.
No notices required.
a | Notices mailed by judge’s staff.
Notified counsel by telephone,
Docketing to mail notices,
Mail AO 450 form. Luno3 19 a
Copy to judge/magistrate judge. MM Asia sn
courtroom 61: kd S2 YyW eu
MPJ deputy's
initial
“_ Daidkhe bereuled TJ
central Clerk's Office



IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION

ENNIS M. KUHN, executor of the
estate of WESLEY O. KUHN, Deceased,

Plaintiff,
v. No. 01 C 4092

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant.

DOCKETED
MAR 2 6 2003
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Plaintiff Ennis M. Kuhn, executrix of the estate of Wesley 0.
Kuhn, has filed this action seeking damages for wrongful death and
medical malpractice in connection with the death of Mr. Kuhn from
gastrointestinal bleeding while in the care of the Hines Veterans
Administration Hospital, an institution run by defendant United
States of America.

Ms. Kuhn has filed fourteen motions in limine. Motions 2, 3,
4, 5, 6, 7, 9, and 12 are granted as unopposed. The remaining
motions are granted and denied as follows.

Motion 1 seeks to bar the introduction of Mr. Kuhn’s prior
medical records. This motion is DenrEp. Mr. Kuhn’s cause of death is
at the heart of this matter. Information about his medical history
is not only relevant, it is essential.

Motion 11 seeks to prevent the United States’ expert witness,

Dr. Hanauer, from testifying about any of seven different topics on

oe



the grounds that these topics were not addressed in the expert
witness reports disclosed to the plaintiff. The purpose of an
expert witness report is to avoid surprise at trial and minimize or
eliminate the need to depose experts. Salgado v. GMC, 150 F.3d 735,
742 (7th Cir. 1998). In order to further that goal, an expert
witness report must include both a complete and detailed statement
of all opinions to be expressed at trial and “the basis and reasons
in support of those opinions” as well as “the data or other
information used by the witness in forming the opinions.” Id.
(quoting Robert Matthew Lovein, x itioner’s ide: F

Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)-Automatic Di sure, 47 Syracuse Law
Rev. 225, 255 (1996)). Conclusory statements do not meet this
standard. Id. Dr. Hanauer’s reports are inadequate under this
standard. They consist almost entirely of conclusory statements
about the adequacy of Mr. Kuhn’s care and the likely cause of his
demise; they are devoid of reasoning and data.

Rule 37(c)(1) states that if a party without substantial
justification fails to disclose information required by Rule 26(a),
such information is not admissible, unless the failure to disclose
was harmless. The United States offers no justification for its
failure to comply with Rule 26. Motion 11 is therefore granted.
(Motions 8 and 10 are thus moot.)

Motion 13 seeks to bar Dr. Robert Schlidt, who provided

medical care to Mr. Kuhn for several years, from offering an