In Scott v. C.R. Bard, Inc. (2014) 231 Cal.App.4th 763, the trial court initially excluded certain evidence pursuant to a motion in limine; during trial, the court reversed the ruling and admitted the evidence. (Id. at p. 771.) The appellate court upheld the ruling, concluding the defendant's opening statement made the evidence relevant and the trial "court had made it clear to both parties when it made the in limine rulings that they were subject to change and the defendant was aware of this when it questioned the potential jurors." (Id. at p. 784.)