Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1607 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/02/2017 Page 1 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 08-MD-01916-MARRA

IN RE: CHIQUITA BRANDS INTERNATIONAL, INC.

ALIEN TORT STATUTE AND
SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE LITIGATION
/

This Document Relates to:

ATA ACTIONS
/

Case No. 08-20641-CIV-MARRA

TANIA JULIN, et al.,

Plaintiffs,
v.

CHIQUITA BRANDS INTERNATIONAL, INC.,

Defendant.
/

Case No. 09-cv-80683-CIV-MARRA

OLIVIA PESCATORE, et al.,

Plaintiffs,
v.

CHIQUITA BRANDS INTERNATIONAL, INC., et al.,

Defendants.
/

Case No. 11-cv-80402-CIV-MARRA

ESTATE OF JANE PESCATORE SPARROW,

Plaintiff,

v.

CHIQUITA BRANDS INTERNATIONAL, INC., et al.,

Defendants.
/

1
Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1607 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/02/2017 Page 2 of 5

DEFENDANT CHIQUITAS SECOND MOTION IN LIMINE TO

PRECLUDE MENTION OR EVIDENCE OF THE FARC AS A
FOREIGN TERRORIST ORGANIZATION

Pursuant to Rules 401, 402, and 403 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, Defendant Chiquita

Brands International, Inc. (Chiquita) moves in limine for an Order precluding Plaintiffs and their

counsel from mentioning, soliciting testimony from witnesses about, or introducing documents at

trial regarding the designation of the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC)

as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) by the United States Department of State.

Plaintiffs claims against Chiquita are premised upon Chiquitas payments to the FARC,

which allegedly constituted a conspiracy with the FARC and enabled the FARC to kidnap and kill

Plaintiffs decedents. (Julin Third Amended Complaint, DE 1273, 1, 212-219, 221-222;

Pescatore Second Amended Complaint, DE 1287, 1, 87-96.) The Julin Plaintiffs decedents were

kidnapped in 1993 and 1994; the Pescatore Plaintiffs decedent was kidnapped in 1996. (Julin Third

Amended Complaint, DE 1273, 54-89, 112-141; Pescatore Second Amended Complaint, DE

1287, 46-48.) The Julin Plaintiffs decedents died in 1995 and 1996. (Julin Resps. To Requests

for Admissions, DE 1333-1, Nos. 16-17; Julin Resps. To Requests for Admissions, DE 1333-1,

Nos. 13-15.) The Pescatore Plaintiffs decedent died on February 23, 1997. (Pescatore Resps. To

Requests for Admissions, DE 1333-2, Nos. 12-13.) The FARC was not designated as an FTO until

October 8, 1997. (Julin Third Amended Complaint, DE 1273, 183; Pescatore Second Amended

Complaint, DE 1287, 40.) Thus, the FTO designation occurred after Plaintiffs decedents were

kidnapped and killed. As even the United States Government conceded, there is no evidence that

Chiquita paid the FARC after it was designated as an FTO. United States v. Chiquita Brands

International, Inc., Case No. 1:07-CR-00055-RCL, Governments Sentencing Memorandum, DE

17 at p. 2 n.2.

2
Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1607 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/02/2017 Page 3 of 5

Statements or evidence that the FARC was designated as an FTO does not make any fact of

consequence in the determination of these actions more or less probable. Indeed, the FTO

designation occurred after Plaintiffs decedents were kidnapped and killed, and after Chiquita had

ceased making payments to the FARCthe designation thus has no impact whatsoever on

Plaintiffs claims. This evidence is therefore not relevant. See Fed. R. Evid. 401. Evidence that is

not relevant is not admissible. See Fed. R. Evid. 402.

Moreover, evidence of the FARCs designation as an FTO should be excluded under

Evidence Rule 403. Even if the designation were somehow remotely relevant and carried any

probative value, such value is heavily outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice, confusion of the

issues, and of misleading the jury. See Fed. R. Evid. 403. Allowing such evidence of the FARCs

FTO designation would mislead the jury into believing that Chiquita paid the FARC after it had

been designated as a terrorist organization, and would confuse the only issue of whether Chiquita

violated the Antiterrorism Act by making payments to the FARC. Indeed, the only purposes for

offering such evidence would be to inflame the passions of the jury and, in doing so, to elicit an

emotional decision by the jury, rather than a decision based on the merits. Avoiding this type of

emotional decision-making and confusion of the issues is the exact purpose of Rule 403 and of

granting motions in limine such as this. See Horrillo v. Cook, Inc., No. 09-60931-CIV-

MATTHEWMAN, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86571, at **10-11 (S.D. Fla. June 6, 2014).

The Court should grant this Motion and preclude Plaintiffs from offering or eliciting

irrelevant and highly inflammatory evidence that the FARC was designated as an FTO.

Dated: November 2, 2017 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Michael L. Cioffi

Michael L. Cioffi (pro hac vice) (Trial Attorney)
Thomas H. Stewart (pro hac vice)
BLANK ROME LLP

3
Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1607 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/02/2017 Page 4 of 5

1700 PNC Center

201 East Fifth Street
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202
Direct Dial: (513) 362-8701/04
Facsimile: (513) 362-8702/93
Email: cioffi@blankrome.com
stewart@blankrome.com

Frank A. Dante (pro hac vice)

BLANK ROME LLP
One Logan Square
130 N. 18th Street
Philadelphia, PA 9103
Direct Dial: (215) 569-5645
Email: dante@blankrome.com

Counsel for Defendant Chiquita Brands

International, Inc.

4
Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1607 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/02/2017 Page 5 of 5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that I electronically filed the foregoing document with the Clerk of

the Court using CM/ECF on November 2, 2017. I also certify that the foregoing document is being

served this day on all counsel of record registered to receive electronic Notices of Electronic Filing

generated by CM/ECF.

/s/ Michael L. Cioffi

Michael L. Cioffi