Pinson et al v. 45 Development, LLC et al
ORDER denying 71 Motion in Limine; denying 73 Motion in Limine; denying 80 Motion in Limine; denying 86 Motion in Limine; and denying as moot 77 Motion to Amend/Correct. Refer to the Order for further instructions from the Court. Signed by Honorable P. K. Holmes, III on May 28, 2013. (jas) Modified text on 5/28/2013 (jas).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
FORT SMITH DIVISION
CURTIS PINSON and CRISTI PINSON,
Individually and as Husband and Wife
Case No. 2:12-CV-02160
45 DEVELOPMENT, LLC; CITI TRENDS, INC.;
CITI TRENDS, INC., d/b/a CITITRENDS; and
BRANDRITE SIGN COMPANY, INC.
Currently before the Court are four separate motions in limine filed by Plaintiffs. (Docs. 71,
73, 80, 86). This case is not set for trial until October 7, 2013. The discovery deadline is not until
July 25, 2013. Plaintiffs only recently filed a Fourth Amended Complaint (Doc. 82), on May 22,
Neither the parties nor the Court can be expected to know with any level of certainty what
evidence, testimony, or argument will be offered at trial. It would be premature for the Court to
make rulings as to relevance and admissibility at this point in the litigation. Furthermore, it would
be a waste of time for the parties to argue, and the Court to consider, points that may be mooted as
the litigation progresses. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motions in Limine (Docs.
71, 73, 80, 86) are DENIED at this time. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion to
Amend their second Motion in Limine (Doc. 77) is DENIED AS MOOT.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties are prohibited from filing motions in limine in
this case before September 13, 2013. In addition, the parties must confer before filing any motion
in limine, and must include—for each point argued—a statement indicating whether any opposing
IT IS SO ORDERED this 28th day of May, 2013.
/s/P. K. Holmes, III
P.K. HOLMES, III
CHIEF U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE
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?