Court Opinion

ID: 2964907
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:32:49.973794+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:01:15.323511
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                                 ____________________

        No. 96-2196

                               RICHARD WAYNE GARGANTA,

                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                                 UNION CENTRAL LIFE,

                                 Defendant, Appellee.

                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                           FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

                [Hon. Raymond J. Pettine, Senior U.S. District Judge]
                                          __________________________

                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                 Selya, Circuit Judge,
                                        _____________
                              Cyr, Senior Circuit Judge,
                                   ____________________
                              and Boudin, Circuit Judge.
                                          _____________

                                 ____________________

            Richard Wayne Garganta on brief pro se.
            ______________________
            David P. Whitman and Hanson, Curran, Parks & Whitman on brief  for
            ________________     _______________________________
        appellee.

                                 ____________________

                                    July 14, 1997
                                 ____________________

                      Per  Curiam.     Plaintiff-appellant  brought  this
                      ___________

            diversity action against his private  insurer alleging breach

            of contract in the denial of a claim for disability insurance

            benefits.   The  insurer maintained  that  plaintiff was  not

            "totally disabled" within the meaning of the policy.   On the

            morning of the  trial, the district  court granted a  defense

            motion in limine to exclude  from evidence a Social  Security
                   __ ______

            Administration record and finding  that for a period of  time

            plaintiff was under a  "disability" as defined in  the Social

            Security   Act.    A  motion  by  plaintiff  for  a  two-week

            continuance  to seek additional medical testimony was denied.

            Although  plaintiff's counsel reported a readiness to proceed

            to trial with other medical and lay witnesses, plaintiff then

            discharged his  counsel and  refused to put  his case  to the

            jury.  Final judgment was entered for the insurer.   

                      Having reviewed  the abbreviated record  and briefs

            with  care,  we  see   no  abuse  of  the  district   court's

            considerable discretion to  weigh the probative value  of the

            social security evidence  and determine its  admissibility in

            light of competing  factors.  See  Fed. R. Evid. 403.   Given
                                          ___

            the circumstances,  carefully weighed and articulated  by the

            court,  there  also   was  no  abuse  in  the   denial  of  a

            continuance. 

                      As  to each of  plaintiff's multiple assignments of

            error   in  the   pretrial   proceedings,  we   apprehend  no

                                         -2-

            prejudicial effect  on the  outcome of the  case, and  see no

            reason to suppose that he was entitled to summary judgment as

            a matter of law.

                      Affirmed.  See Loc. R. 27.1.
                      ________   ___

                                         -3-