Romero v. Yates et al

Filing 83

ORDER on Defendant's Motions in Limine. 78 and 79 . Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 10/5/2017. (Timken, A)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

DAVID ROMERO,
Plaintiff,

9

Case No. 1:14-cv-01062-SKO
ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS
IN LIMINE

v.

10

(Docs. 78, 79)

11
12
13

JAMES YATES,
Defendant.
_____________________________________/

14
15

The Court conducted a hearing on Defendant’s Motions in Limine on October 4, 2017.

16 Plaintiffs David Romero appeared telephonically through his counsel, Steven A. Geringer, Esq.,
17 and Defendant James Yates appeared telephonically through his counsel John C. Bridges, Esq.,
18 and Peter Meshot, Esq.
19

As set forth on the record in open court, Defendant’s Motions in Limine (“MIL”) are ruled

20 upon as follows:
21

1.

Defendant’s MIL No. 1 to exclude evidence referring to criminal charges brought

22 against Plaintiff arising from the subject incident, the disposition of Plaintiff’s criminal
23 prosecution arising from the incident, including the Madera County District Attorney’s decision to
24 dismiss all charges, and the lack of criminal charges against Defendant, is GRANTED.
25

2.

Defendant’s MIL No. 2 to exclude evidence referring to the arrest of Plaintiff by

26 former Defendants Lancaster, Jimenez, and Ruvalcaba, and any injuries allegedly sustained during
27 the arrest, including photographs of Plaintiff’s injuries related to the arrest, is GRANTED.
28 //

These rulings shall be incorporated in the parties’ pretrial submissions, the deadlines for

1

2 which are set forth in the Court’s Amended Pretrial Order Continuing Trial and Certain Pretrial
3 Deadlines (Doc. 77).
4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6 Dated:
7

October 5, 2017

/s/

Sheila K. Oberto

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2

.