Opinion ID: 1161670
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Did the Trial Court Abuse Its Discretion in Denying Belluomini's Attempts to Supplement His Witness List?

Text: We review the trial court's admission or exclusion of evidence for abuse of discretion. [15] We will reverse such a decision only when left with the definite and firm conviction that the trial court erred in its decision. [16] Belluomini argues that the trial court erred in precluding him from calling witnesses in the course of the trial. Specifically, he wished to call Fred Meyer employees Christine Carmichael, Kenneth Pearcy, Ginger Schneider, and Richard Steen, after learning that Fred Meyer would not be calling them as witnesses. In his offer of proof, Belluomini asserted that he would elicit testimony from these witnesses to show bad faith on the part of Fred Meyer. But the trial court could properly reject Belluomini's requests to call these witnesses because he had failed to include them on his witness list and offered no good reason for this omission. Moreover, because Belluomini had expressly disavowed any claim of bad faith against Fred Meyer, the proposed witnesses' testimony concerning Fred Meyer's bad faith would have been wholly irrelevant. Accordingly, we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing Belluomini's attempts to supplement his witness list.