Best Buy Stores, L.P. v. Manteca Lifestyle Center, LLC

Filing 184

STIPULATION and ORDER Re Motions in Limine and Trial Evidence 176 signed by Judge William B. Shubb on 5/30/2012. (See document for details.)(Kirksey Smith, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6

Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counter-Defendant
BEST BUY STORES, L.P.

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - SACRAMENTO DIVISION

10

L OS A NGELES

A TTORNEYS A T L AW

R OBINS , K APLAN , M ILLER & C IRESI L.L.P.

7

Michael A. Geibelson, Bar No. 179970
[e-mail]
Amy M. Churan, Bar No. 216932
[e-mail]
ROBINS, KAPLAN, MILLER & CIRESI L.L.P.
2049 Century Park East, Suite 3400
Los Angeles, CA 90067-3208
Telephone:
310-552-0130
Facsimile:
310-229-5800

11
12

BEST BUY STORES, L.P., a Virginia limited
partnership,
Plaintiff,

13
14
15

Case No. 2:10-CV-00389-WBS-KJN
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER RE: MOTIONS IN LIMINE AND
TRIAL EVIDENCE

v.
MANTECA LIFESTYLE CENTER, LLC. a
Delaware limited liability company,

16

Defendant.

17
18

MANTECA LIFESTYLE CENTER, LLC

19
20
21
22

Counter-Claimant
v.
BEST BUY STORES, L.P., a Virginia limited
partnership,
Counter-Defendant

23
24
25
26
27
28
60587142.6
60592681.1

STIPULATION RE MOTIONS IN LIMINE
AND TRIAL EVIDENCE

1
2
3
4
5
6

8
9
10

L OS A NGELES

A TTORNEYS A T L AW

R OBINS , K APLAN , M ILLER & C IRESI L.L.P.

7

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

TO THIS HONORABLE COURT, ALL PARTIES AND THEIR RESPECTIVE ATTORNEYS:
Plaintiff BEST BUY STORES, L.P., (“Best Buy”) and Defendant MANTECA
LIFESTYLE CENTER, LLC (“Manteca), collectively referred to as the “Parties,” by and through
their respective undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and agree as follows:
WHEREAS, on April 2, 2012, Manteca filed its Statement on Estimate of Voir Dire and
Motions in Limine (Dkt. 160) and Best Buy filed its Report Re: Motions in Limine and Voir Dire
(Dkt. 161);
WHEREAS, on May 7, 2012 and thereafter, counsel for Best Buy and counsel for
Manteca met and conferred regarding the substance of the Parties’ motions in limine, as set forth
in their respective reports to this Court regarding the Parties’ proposed motions in limine;
WHEREAS, counsel for the Parties agreed to stipulate regarding certain proposed motions
in limine and with respect to the presentment of evidence and witnesses at trial,
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the Parties, and subject to the Court’s
approval, that:
1.

Each party will limit its opening statement to a maximum of 75 minutes.

2.

Without waiving other evidentiary objections, the parties stipulate to the

authenticity of the exhibits identified by the parties on their Exhibit List.
3.

Trial Exhibit No. 593 is a true and authentic copy of Poag and McEwen's web

page that was posted on the Internet in February 2009 before Best Buy opened.
4.

Best Buy opened its store on February 27, 2009.

5.

The parties shall not introduce any evidence, argument, and/or testimony

concerning the content of any articles, seminar or symposium materials from the International
Council of Shopping Centers (“ICSC”) or any other similar source (e.g. Exhibit 237 to the
Deposition of Michael Di Geronimo) on the ground that such evidence and/or testimony
constitutes inadmissible hearsay and improper expert opinion. This stipulation does not apply to
dictionary definitions, including but not limited to those contained in the ICSC Dictionary of
Shopping Center Terms, and other authoritative sources permitted to be admitted pursuant to
60587142.6
60592681.1

-2-

STIPULATION RE MOTIONS IN LIMINE

1

Federal Rule of Evidence 803(18). Based on this stipulation Best Buy hereby withdraws its

2

Motion in Limine No. 8 as set forth in Dkt. 161 and Manteca withdraws is Motion in Limine 10

3

as set forth in Dkt. 160.

4

6.

The parties agree that with respect to the witnesses who both sides may be calling

examination to the opening direct examination and cross-examination to the other party’s direct;

8

and (4) Redirect to the second direct, and thereafter such recross-examination and re-direct

9

examination as the court may allow. Witnesses intended to be covered by this Paragraph include

10

L OS A NGELES

examination, (2) Cross-examination and direct examination by the other party; (3) Redirect

7

A TTORNEYS A T L AW

for their case in chief who will only be testifying once, the order of questioning will be (1) Direct

6

R OBINS , K APLAN , M ILLER & C IRESI L.L.P.

5

Kathryn Beine, Steve Craig, Alesia Kempe, Scott Kern, Jason Kraus, Pat Matre, Bud Moll, Josh

11

Poag, Tricia Remus, John Sarokhan, Ross Schram, and Shirl Wills. This Paragraph does not

12

apply to Melissa Moseley who is being presented in both parties’ cases but testifying twice.

13

Finally, this Paragraph does not apply to the remaining witnesses to be called separately by the

14

parties.

15

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

16
17

DATED: May 29, 2012

18

ROBINS, KAPLAN, MILLER & CIRESI L.L.P.
By:

19
20

Attorney For Plaintiff And Counter-Defendant
Best Buy Stores, L.P.

21
22

/s/Michael A. Geibelson_______
Michael A. Geibelson
Amy M. Churan

DATED: May 29, 2012

23

GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
By:

24

/s/Howard Jeruchimowitz
Howard Jeruchimowitz

Attorney For Defendant And Counter-Claimant
Manteca Lifestyle Center, LLC

25
26
27
28
60587142.6
60592681.1

-3-

STIPULATION RE MOTIONS IN LIMINE

1

ORDER

2

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

3

DATED: May 30, 2012

4
5
6

8
9
10

L OS A NGELES

A TTORNEYS A T L AW

R OBINS , K APLAN , M ILLER & C IRESI L.L.P.

7

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
60587142.6
60592681.1

-4-

STIPULATION RE MOTIONS IN LIMINE