District courts have broad discretion over the admissibility of evidence and control of pretrial and trial proceedings. Stevenson v. Felco Indus., 2009 MT 299, ¶ 32, 352 Mont. 303, 216 P.3d 763.
We review a district court's decisions regarding management of litigation for an abuse of discretion. See Fink v. Williams, 2012 MT 304, ¶¶ 18, 20, 367 Mont. 431, 291 P.3d 1140 (citation omitted) (noting that "[t]he District Court has broad discretion in determining issues relating to trial administration and finding "no abuse of the court's discretion in its management of the trial"). Discretionary trial court rulings include such things as trial administration issues, scope of cross-examination, post-trial motions and similar rulings. Fink, ¶ 18 (citation and quotation marks omitted).
M. R. Civ. P. 16 (Rule 16) generally addresses a district court's pretrial case management functions. Rule 16(a) authorizes a court, in its discretion, to direct attorneys and unrepresented parties to appear for pretrial conferences. Rule 16(b) specifically addresses scheduling orders which follow such conferences. Stevenson, ¶ 32 (citation omitted).