UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIR E

Rosemarv A . Gilro V

v . Civil No. 07-cv-0074-JD

Ameriauest Mortgage CompanV, et al .

O R D E R

Proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, Rosemary A . Gilroy

brought suit against Ameriquest Mortgage Company ("Ameriquest"),

Ameriquest Mortgage Company Mortgage Services, Inc . ("AMC

Services"), and Citi Residential Lending, Inc . ("Citi"), alleging

predatory lending practices in violation of New Hampshire law .

The court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants on

Counts I, II, III, IV, and VI of Gilroy's amended complaint, and

the only remaining claim in this case is the harassment claim, as

alleged in Count V . The defendants filed a motion in limine to

preclude Gilroy from testifying in narrative form at trial .

Gilroy objects .

Discussion

I . Applicable Legal Standar d

"The court shall exercise reasonable control over the mode

and order of interrogating witnesses and presenting evidence so

as to (1) make the interrogation and presentation effective for

Case 1:07-cv-00074-JD Document 90 Filed 03/03/09 Page 1 of 3
the ascertainment of the truth, (2) avoid needless consumption of

time, and (3) protect witnesses from harassment or undue

embarrassment ." Fed . R . Evid . 611(a) . Under Rule 611, the court

has discretion to allow or bar narrative testimony . See National

R .R . Passenger Corp . v . Certain Temporary Easements Above

Railroad Right of Way in Providence, Rhode Island , 357 F .3d 36,

42 (1st Cir . 2004) (recognizing trial court has broad discretion

in decisions regarding manner of witness testimony, so long as

undue prejudice does not result to either party) .

II . Analvsi s

Gilroy misunderstands the defendants' motion . She responds

that it will be impossible for her to answer the defendants'

questions with simple "yes" or "no" answers and that she must be

permitted to answer in narrative form . The defendants' motion,

however, does not concern their questioning of her on crossexamination , but rather her own testimony on direct examination . '

The court will not require Gilroy to testify, on direct

examination, in a question and answer format as this will presen t

'Direct examination is "[t]he first questioning of a witness

in a trial . . . conducted by the party who called the witness to

testify ." Black's Law Dictionary 492 (8th ed . 2004) (emphasis

supplied) . Cross-examination is "[t]he questioning of a witness

at trial or hearing by the party opposed to the party who called

the witness to testify ." Id . at 405 (emphasis supplied) .

2

Case 1:07-cv-00074-JD Document 90 Filed 03/03/09 Page 2 of 3
obvious practical difficulties . In giving narrative testimony,

however, Gilroy must comply with the Federal Rules of Evidence .

Before trial, Gilroy would be well-advised to become familiar

with the Federal Rules of Evidence in general, and in particular

with Rules 401, 403, 404(b), 801 through 807, and 901 ; the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure pertaining to trials ; and the

local rules of this district governing trials . In addition,

because Gilroy's case is limited to a single claim - that she was

harassed in violation of New Hampshire Revised Statutes Annotated

Chapter 358-C - all evidence presented at trial must be relevant

and material to that claim . See Procedural Order (March 3,

2009) . The court will not permit general discursive testimony

but only testimony that directly relates to the elements of the

claim in Count V .

Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, the defendants' motion in limine

(document no . 79) is denied .

SO ORDERED .

/s/ Joseph A . DiClerico, Jr .

Joseph A . DiClerico, Jr .

United States District Judge

March 3, 200 9

cc : Rosemary Gilroy, pro se

Thomas Tretter, Esq .

3

Case 1:07-cv-00074-JD Document 90 Filed 03/03/09 Page 3 of 3