C.B. v. Sonora School District, et al.

Filing 141

ORDER Granting in Part and Denying in Part #117 Plaintiff's Motion in Limine, signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 6/14/2011. (Gaumnitz, R)

5

JOHN F. MARTIN, ESQ. (SBN 52618)
CHRISTINE HOPKINS, ESQ. (SBN 240248)
LAW OFFICES OF JOHN F. MARTIN
A Professional Corporation
3100 Oak Road, Suite 230
Post Office Box 5331
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

6

Attorneys for Plaintiff,
C.B.

1
2
3
4

7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12

C.B., a minor,

Case No. 1:09-CV-00285-OWW-SMS
Plaintiff,

13

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND
DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION IN LIMINE

14

v.

15

CITY OF SONORA; CHIEF OF POLICE
MACE MCINTOSH; OFFICER HAL
PROCK

16
17

Defendants.

18

Date:
Time:
Courtroom:
Hon.:

5/12/11
12:00 a.m.
3
Oliver W. Wanger

Action filed: 2/13/09
Trial Date:
07/06/11

19
20
21
22

Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine was heard by this Court on May 12, 2011, the Honorable
Oliver W. Wanger presiding.

23
24
25
26

The Court, having read the supporting and opposing papers, and having heard oral
arguments at the hearing, and good cause appearing, orders as follows:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

27
28
Order on Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine
Case No. 1:09-CV-00285-OWW-SMS

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

1

1.

Evidence of prior conduct of the Plaintiff, namely the 2006 incident at Sonora

2

Elementary School, is impermissible character evidence to the extent it is offered for the purpose of

3

establishing Plaintiff’s conduct or state of mind on September 29, 2008. Defendants are prohibited

4

from introducing arguments to that effect at trial.

5
2. Evidence of prior conduct of the Plaintiff, namely the 2006 incident at Sonora
6
Elementary School, will be admissible, over Plaintiff’s objections thereto, if and only if the Plaintiff
7
puts into issue of the state of mind of Karen Sinclair in deciding to call the police department.
8
Karen Sinclair will be limited to testifying that Plaintiff told her in 2006 that he wanted to run into
9
traffic. The parties agree that if this testimony is given, a limiting instruction will issue to the jury
10
instructing them that they may only consider the testimony for purposes of weighing whether Karen
11
Sinclair had a good faith reason to call the police department and that the law prohibits them from
12
considering the testimony for the purposes of determining whether the police officers had
13
reasonable suspicion or probable cause to detain Plaintiff.
14
15

3. The parties are prohibited from using the words “suicide” or “suicidal” in

16

reference to the 2006 incident or Plaintiff’s conduct or state of mind on September 29, 2008 and

17

shall not solicit such testimony from any witnesses at trial.

18

IT IS SO ORDERED.

19
20

Date: June 14, 2011

21

/s/ OLIVER W. WANGER
United States District Court Judge

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Order on Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine
Case No. 1:09-CV-00285-OWW-SMS

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

1