Green v. Singleton et al

Filing 39

ORDER denying 25 Motion in Limine. Signed by Honorable Barry A. Bryant on November 25, 2013. (mll)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS TEXARKANA DIVISION LAVELL GREEN V. PLAINTIFF CIVIL NO. 4:12-cv-04037 SHERIFF JAMES SINGLETON; JOHNNY GODBOLT; SGT. VERONICA MAULDIN; SIMON AMES; KATHY FINCHER; and PIERRE SUMMERVILLE DEFENDANTS ORDER Plaintiff Lavell Green proceeds in this action pro se and in forma pauperis pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is currently incarcerated in the Arkansas Department of Corrections, Cummins Unit in Grady, Arkansas (“ADC”). Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine. ECF No. 25. In Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine, he requests the Court exclude from evidence Incident Reports from the Hempstead County Detention Center (“HCDC”), where Plaintiff was housed during the time at issue in this case, because such evidence is irrelevant to this case and “is less likely to help get at the truth than it is to prejudice the jury against the Plaintiff.” ECF No. 25. The Court notes that there is currently no evidentiary hearing or trial set in this matter. Further, there is a pending Motion for Summary Judgment which may negate any necessity for an evidentiary hearing or trial in this matter. Lastly, there is no jury demand in this matter, therefore, any trial will be a bench trial and no jury will be present to be prejudiced. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine (ECF No. 25) is DENIED at this time. If, after the Court rules on the pending Motion for Summary Judgment, this matter is set for evidentiary hearing or trial the Plaintiff may re-urge his arguments in the form of an objection to the evidence at issue here. IT IS SO ORDERED this 25th day of November 2013. /s/ Barry A. Bryant HON. BARRY A. BRYANT UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 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?