Nichols v. Hytrol Conveyor Company Inc

Filing 35

ORDER denying 29 Defendant's First Motion in Limine. Signed by Chief Judge J. Leon Holmes on 4/29/2011. (jct)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION
JUDY NICHOLS
v.

PLAINTIFF
No. 3:09CV00224 JLH

HYTROL CONVEYOR COMPANY, INC.

DEFENDANT

ORDER
Hytrol Conveyor Company has filed a motion in limine to exclude from trial the Position
Statement that Hytrol submitted to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”)
during the EEOC’s investigation of Judy Nichol’s discrimination charge.
First, Hytrol contends that the EEOC Position Statement is not relevant and lacks probative
value. The Court disagrees. In the EEOC Position Statement, Hytrol explains its reasons for
terminating Nichols. It states that “Nichols was discharged due to her poor job performance” and
that “Hytrol was [ ] forced to reduce its workforce in an attempt to counter the effects of a significant
downturn in business.” (Def.’s Ex. A.) This explanation is relevant to the issue of whether Nichols’
sex was a motivating factor in her termination.
Hytrol also contends that the two-page Position Statement would be cumulative of other
evidence that will be offered at trial. Without knowing what evidence will be received, it would be
premature for the Court to exclude the EEOC Position Statement on that basis alone. Furthermore,
the Court is not convinced that laying a proper foundation for the admission of the two-page
document will require numerous witnesses and documents presented by both parties, as the
defendant argues. (Def.’s Br. at 4.)
For these reasons, Hytrol’s first motion in limine is DENIED. Document #29.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 29th day of April, 2011.

J. LEON HOLMES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2