Forte v. Jones

Filing 154

ORDER Setting Date For Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's 152 Motion In Limine, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 5/27/2014. (It is hereby ORDERED that Defendant may file and serve any response to the issue discussed in the first paragraph of this order not later than 5:00 p.m. Thursday, May 29, 2014.) (Gaumnitz, R)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

EUGENE FORTE,

9
10
11
12

CASE NO. 1:11-CV-0718 AWI-BAM
Plaintiff

v.

ORDER SETTING DATE FOR
DEFENDANT’S REPSONSE TO
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE,
DOCUMENT NUMBER 152

TOMMY JONES,
Defendant.

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

On May 23, 2014, Plaintiff filed a “Motion in Limine For Clerical Clarification of Second
Amended Complaint” (hereinafter, Plaintiff’s “Motion”). Doc # 152. The primary purpose of
Plaintiff’s Motion is to clarify Plaintiff’s intentions with regard to the scope of Defendant’s
conduct that constitutes the alleged infringement of Plaintiff’s rights under the First Amendment
and therefore should inform the jury’s consideration of damages. It is the court’s understanding,
based on Plaintiff’s Motion and on comments made during the hearing on motions in limine, that
it is Plaintiff contends that all the negative interactions between Plaintiff and Defendant, including
those that were described in Plaintiff’s first and second claims for relief that have been dismissed,
are all examples of retaliation by Defendant against Plaintiff motivated by Plaintiff’s exercise of
his free speech rights. It is therefore Plaintiff’s contention that both evidence of both retaliation
and damage are to be found in Defendant’s actions regarding Plaintiff that both predate and
postdate the city council meeting of May 7, 2008.
Although Plaintiff’s motion also requests clarification of rulings during the hearing on a
number of motions in limine and seeks reconsideration of the court’s refusal to disqualify itself

1

from the proceedings, the court requests that Defendant not address these issues and confine any

2

further briefing to the issue mentioned in the first paragraph of this order.

3
4
5

It is hereby ORDERED that Defendant may file and serve any response to the issue
discussed in the first paragraph of this order not later than 5:00 p.m. Thursday, May 29, 2014.

6
7
8
9

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 27, 2014
SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2