PROVIDENCE — A federal judge yesterday tossed out exhibits that plaintiffs filed in a lawsuit alleging widespread abuse of children in state foster care.

The exhibits included legal documents from other cases and declarations by officials, such as state Child Advocate Jametta O. Alston, about Rhode Island Family Court and “systemic problems” involving the Department of Children, Youth and Families.

Senior U.S. District Judge Ronald R. Lagueux said some of the exhibits appeared to violate rules of evidence and he intended to allow defense lawyers to question those who made the declarations and present new evidence.

“I see a whole series of evidentiary problems with what you have filed,” Lagueux told the plaintiffs’ lawyers. “You have introduced these factual issues at the eleventh hour, so I am giving the defendants an opportunity to depose the witnesses and determine whether these declarants have any knowledge about these particular plaintiffs.”

But plaintiffs’ lawyer Susan Lambiase agreed to eliminate the exhibits so the case would not get bogged down.

“We want to proceed as expeditiously as possible,” said Lambiase, associate director of Children’s Rights, a nonprofit legal organization based in New York City. “We’ll happily strike the exhibits and move forward without any of them rather than go on a tangent and waste time.”

So, Lagueux said, “By agreement, the motion to strike the exhibits is granted.”

That marked the latest action in a sweeping lawsuit that seeks class-action status on behalf of the 3,000 children in state custody and aims for an overhaul of Rhode Island’s child-welfare system.

Lawyers for the attorney general’s office and the Department of Children, Youth and Families have asked Lagueux to dismiss the lawsuit, saying, among other things, that three adults are not qualified to pursue the litigation on behalf of the seven foster children who are named, using pseudonyms, in the suit.

Both sides filed legal briefs debating that question and other issues in February. On March 6, defense lawyers filed a motion seeking to eliminate exhibits attached to the plaintiffs’ brief, saying the exhibits “improperly expanded the record.”

“The declarations contain statements with regard to what the three individuals perceive to be the legal authority of the Rhode Island Family Court and/or the role of the Court Appointed Special Advocate,” defense lawyers wrote. “These declarations contain conclusory statements and are not validated by any certified Family Court decree or document. Further, the declarations contain no factual foundation to support how they apply to any individual named plaintiffs in this case.”

On March 7, the plaintiffs’ lawyers responded, saying, “Defendants, having absolutely no legal basis to do so, now take the incredible step of asking this court not to consider exhibits properly placed before it by plaintiffs in their supplemental briefing.”

Defense lawyers also claimed that Alston was “improperly testifying as a witness” when she was one of the lawyers who filed the suit.

Plaintiffs’ lawyers contended that Alston’s declaration was proper, saying that the content of her statement does not make her a necessary witness at trial and that “it is not being represented that she will be trial counsel.”

Defense lawyers also challenged Alston’s statement that she has had “substantial experience appearing before the Rhode Island Family Court — as a private practitioner, as a Rhode Island special assistant attorney general, and as the Cranston city solicitor.”

Defense lawyers said that while she was state prosecutor, “Ms. Alston would have rarely, if at all, appeared before the Rhode Island Family Court.”

Plaintiffs’ lawyers said, “Even if the unsupported statements in the defendants’ memorandum were taken as true, they would not negate the child advocate’s statement that she has had substantial experience in Rhode Island Family Court. Defendants are yet again merely taking another potshot at the independent Office of the Child Advocate in their attempt to prejudice this court.”

efitzpat@projo.com