Hurtado et al v. AM Transport Services, Inc. et al

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
LILLIAN HURTADO, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. No. 1:22-cv-00599-KG-JFR
FNF CONSTRUCTION INC., et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The Court addressed FNF Construction Inc.’s motions in limine to exclude evidence of
other traffic backups and accidents, Doc. 271, and adverse personnel actions against Delbert
Shirley, Doc. 270, at the pretrial conference on November 20, 2025. See Doc. 313 (reserving
ruling on these motions until the pretrial conference). For the reasons stated at the pretrial
conference and below, the Court grants in part and denies in part both motions.
The Federal Rules of Evidence “contemplate the admission of relevant evidence, and the
exclusion of irrelevant and potentially prejudicial evidence.” Train v. City of Albuquerque, 629
F. Supp. 2d 1243, 1247 (D.N.M. 2009). Relevant evidence—evidence that has a tendency to
make the existence of any fact of consequence more or less probable—is admissible. Fed. R.
Evid. 401. Irrelevant evidence is inadmissible. Fed. R. Evid. 402. Even if evidence is relevant,
it may be excluded if, on balance, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger
of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or
needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. Fed. R. Evid. 403.
FNF’s motion to exclude evidence of other traffic backups and accidents (Doc. 271) is
granted in part and denied in part. The Court grants the motion in part and excludes the June 26,
Case 1:22-cv-00599-KG-JFR Document 375 Filed 12/02/25 Page 1 of 2

2
2021, diary written after the crash at issue as irrelevant and prejudicial under Rule 403. The
Court also excludes any other traffic diary that does not specifically reference traffic congestion,
traffic accidents, and vehicle backups, as those diaries are also irrelevant and prejudicial under
Rule 403. The motion is denied in all other respects.
The Court likewise grants in part and denies in part FNF’s motion to exclude adverse
personnel actions taken against Delbert Shirley. Doc. 270. The Court grants the motion in part
and excludes evidence concerning (1) Mr. Shirley’s alleged misuse of a company gas card and
(2) adverse employment actions against Mr. Shirley that occurred after the crash at issue, as such
evidence is irrelevant and prejudicial under Rule 403. The motion is denied in all other respects.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/Kenneth J.Gonzales___________________
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
• Please note that this document has been
electronically filed. To verify its
authenticity, please refer to the Digital File
Stamp on the NEF (Notice of Electronic
Filing) accompanying this document.
Electronically filed documents can be found
on the Court’s PACER public access system.
Case 1:22-cv-00599-KG-JFR Document 375 Filed 12/02/25 Page 2 of 2