Presentation Time Limits Approved by Massachusetts Top Court

A trial court judge is within their right to impose time limits on the presentation of evidence to accommodate their personal schedule, Massachusetts’ Supreme Judicial Court said Friday.

A judge “has broad discretion over setting a schedule for the presentation of evidence, so long as exercise of that discretion is reasonable and does not interfere with a party’s right to present his or her case,” the opinion said.

The guidance comes from a dispute over a wrongful death trial. Joni Babaletos brought a case against Philip Morris USA Inc., R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, and DeMoulas Super Markets Inc.—which does business under the name Market Basket—for producing and selling cigarettes that she claims caused the death of her husband Thomas.

Trial court judge Camille Sarrouf Jr. imposed a time limit of 28 hours per side to present evidence during the 2021 trial, which lasted more than three weeks. He allegedly did so due to the upcoming Veterans’ Day holiday and a conference he had to attend.

But Babaletos’ failure to request more time until closing arguments was fatal to her appeal, the opinion said.

“Given that the trial judge repeatedly offered to extend scheduled half days to full days should the need arise during trial, that the plaintiff made no such requests as the trial progressed, and that the trial judge adopted the only two specific requests the plaintiff made for more time, we conclude that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in setting reasonable time limits in this case,” the opinion said.

The opinion offered basic guidance judges should consider when deciding whether to impose a trial limit.

“A trial judge should perform an informed analysis of case-specific circumstances, including but not limited to the complexity of a case and the parties’ representations of their needs,” the opinion said. “Flexibility is essential,” and judges should “reassess imposed time limits in light of evolving circumstances at trial.”

Andrew Rainer of Brody Hardoon Perkins & Kesten LLP represented Babaletos. Scott A. Chesin of Shook, Hardy & Bacon represented DeMoulas Super Markets.

The case is Babaletos vs. DeMoulas Super Markets Inc., Mass., No. SJC-13469, 2/2/24.