## Facts

- Lisa Beth Judd sued Dennis Rodman in federal court alleging tortious transmission of genital herpes and related claims (battery, fraud, and intentional infliction of emotional distress), seeking compensatory and punitive damages and attorneys’ fees.
- During discovery and pretrial proceedings, Rodman sought to introduce evidence about Judd’s prior sexual history, her work as a nude dancer, and her breast augmentation surgery.
- Judd moved in limine to exclude: (1) prior sexual history and nude dancing under Federal Rule of Evidence 412, and (2) breast augmentation under Rule 402 (relevance).
- Rodman filed a conditional Rule 412(c) motion asserting Rule 412 was inapplicable, but alternatively arguing for admission under Rule 412(b) because probative value substantially outweighed unfair prejudice.
- The district court denied Judd’s motions in limine but stated the ruling was not final; the court said admissibility would be addressed as evidence was offered, outside the jury’s presence if necessary.
- The district court instructed Judd to renew objections at trial “just as though it had never been brought up before,” and suggested some challenged evidence might be more relevant to damages than to liability.
- At the beginning of trial, the court stated its view that Rule 412 did not apply.
- The jury returned a verdict for Rodman, and Judd appealed, challenging admission of the disputed evidence.

## Issues

1. Whether Federal Rule of Evidence 412 applies in a civil tort action alleging wrongful transmission of a sexually transmitted disease and related harms.
2. Whether Judd preserved appellate review of the evidentiary issues after losing motions in limine, where the trial court characterized the rulings as preliminary and directed contemporaneous objections at trial.

## Decision

- The Eleventh Circuit held that Rule 412 applies to civil cases when evidence is offered to prove an alleged victim’s “other sexual behavior” or “sexual predisposition,” and is not limited to criminal sexual-assault prosecutions.
- The court affirmed the judgment for Rodman because Judd failed to make timely, specific objections at trial after being instructed to renew objections when the evidence was offered.
- Because the objections were not preserved, the court declined to reach a category-by-category admissibility analysis under Rule 412(b) and found no basis for reversal under plain-error review.

## Legal Principles

- Federal Rule of Evidence 412 applies in civil actions when the proffered evidence concerns an alleged victim’s sexual behavior or sexual predisposition; the rule’s protections are not confined to criminal prosecutions.
- When a trial court treats a ruling on a motion in limine as tentative and directs counsel to object when evidence is introduced, failure to make contemporaneous objections generally forfeits appellate review of the evidentiary claim.
- A denied motion in limine, without a definitive ruling that excuses further objection, ordinarily does not preserve error for appeal.
- Preservation rules can be dispositive even where the challenged evidence falls within a rule designed to limit unfairly prejudicial sexual-history evidence.

## Conclusion

The Eleventh Circuit recognized that Rule 412 can govern evidentiary disputes in civil STD-transmission tort litigation, but it affirmed the defense verdict because the plaintiff did not preserve her Rule 412 and related objections by renewing them at trial as the district court required.


Judd v. Rodman, 105 F.3d 1339 (11th Cir. 1997)