Duarte v. Catalina Foothills School District No. 16
Filing
84
ORDER re: ACRD Determination. Signed by Judge James A Soto on 11/3/14.
1
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8
9
Gary S. Duarte,
No. CV-12-00844-TUC-JAS
Plaintiff,
10
11
v.
12
ORDER
Catalina Foothills School District No. 16,
13
Defendant.
14
On 11/3/14, the Court held a pretrial conference with the parties to discuss
15
pending matters related to the jury trial set for 11/4/14. At the pretrial conference, the
16
parties expressed their respective positions pertaining to the admissibility of Defendant’s
17
Exhibit 54 which is a “no cause” determination from the Arizona Civil Rights Division
18
(“ACRD”). The determination is simply a fill-in-the-blank form which has an “X”
19
marked next to a sentence that summarily states that based on the ACRD’s investigation,
20
“the information is not sufficient to establish violations of the statute(s).” The Ninth
21
Circuit has held that such “no cause” determinations are not per se admissible, but require
22
the trial court to weigh its probative value against Rule 403 considerations. See Beachy
23
v. Boise Cascade Corp., 191 F.3d 1010, 1015 (9th Cir. 1999). As the fill-in-the-blank
24
form does not discuss the extent of any investigation by the ACRD and does not give any
25
analysis whatsoever, the probative value is minimal at best. In light of the low probative
26
value of the determination and upon consideration of the Rule 403 factors, the Court
27
finds that the minimal relevance of the ACRD’s decision is outweighed by Rule 403
28
factors such that it must be excluded at trial. See Fed. R. Evid. 403 (“The court may
1
exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger
2
of one or more of the following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the
3
jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.”).
4
5
Dated this 3rd day of November, 2014.
6
7
8
9
10
Honorable James A. Soto
United States District Judge
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?