Opinion ID: 1775430
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: issues

Text: WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT'S ORDER GRANTING THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE CONSTITUTED REVERSIBLE ERROR. Prior to calling Dr. Michaelson as an expert witness, counsel for the defendant filed a motion in limine requesting that the court order that the plaintiff's counsel be prohibited from asking Dr. Michaelson whether he was insured by the same malpractice liability carrier that insured Dr. Coleman. For purposes of this motion, defense counsel stipulated that Dr. Michaelson was insured by Mutual Assurance Society of Alabama; that Dr. Coleman was also insured by Mutual Assurance Society of Alabama; and that Mutual Assurance Society of Alabama is a mutual insurance company. Plaintiff acknowledges that in Otwell v. Bryant, 497 So.2d 111 (Ala.1986), this Court held that the trial court may properly exclude testimony that the defendant's experts belong to the same mutual liability insurance carrier as the defendant. The appellant asks us to revisit Otwell and reconsider its effect. This we are not prepared to do. We find the holding in Otwell to be dispositive of this issue on appeal, and we hold that the trial court did not err in granting the defendant's motion in limine to prevent the plaintiff from asking Dr. Michaelson whether he was insured by the same malpractice liability carrier that insured Dr. Coleman. Based on the foregoing, we hold that the trial court did not commit any reversible errors. Therefore, the judgment appealed from is due to be, and it hereby is, affirmed. AFFIRMED. JONES, ADAMS, HOUSTON and STEAGALL, JJ., concur.