Legal Definitions - preclusion order

A preclusion order is a formal command issued by a court that prevents a party in a lawsuit from introducing specific evidence, arguments, or claims during the legal proceedings. Courts typically issue such orders as a sanction when a party fails to comply with discovery rules, court deadlines, or other judicial directives. The purpose is to ensure fairness, encourage compliance with procedural rules, and prevent unfair surprise or delay in litigation.

• Example 1: Undisclosed Documents

  In a contract dispute, the plaintiff was ordered to provide all relevant financial records to the defendant by a specific date. The plaintiff, however, failed to disclose several key invoices until just before the trial was scheduled to begin. To prevent unfair surprise and penalize the plaintiff for non-compliance, the judge issued a preclusion order, preventing the plaintiff from introducing those newly disclosed invoices as evidence during the trial.

  This example illustrates how the court prevents a party from using evidence that was not disclosed according to the court's schedule, ensuring the opposing party has adequate time to review all materials.

• Example 2: Unidentified Witnesses

  During a product liability case, the court set a deadline for both sides to identify all expert witnesses they intended to call. The defense attorney failed to list a crucial engineering expert by the deadline. As a result, the court issued a preclusion order, barring that unlisted expert from testifying at trial, even though their testimony might have been relevant to the defense.

  Here, the preclusion order prevents a party from presenting testimony from a witness who was not properly identified within the court's timeframe, maintaining procedural fairness and preventing last-minute additions.

• Example 3: Failure to Respond to Discovery

  In a civil rights lawsuit, the defendant repeatedly ignored the plaintiff's requests for information (known as interrogatories) about their internal policies, despite multiple warnings and court orders to respond. Frustrated by the defendant's persistent non-compliance, the judge issued a preclusion order. This order prevented the defendant from presenting any arguments or evidence at trial that relied on the information they had failed to provide during the discovery phase.

  This scenario demonstrates a preclusion order being used as a sanction to prevent a party from using information they deliberately withheld during discovery, thereby ensuring that parties engage in good faith in the information-gathering process.