Pryor v. City and County of San Francisco et al

Filing 169

ORDER re 167 Pretrial Conference - Interim. Signed by Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte on 11/25/13. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/25/2013)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 DAVID J. PRYOR, Plaintiff, 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California ORDER FOLLOWING SECOND PRETRIAL CONFERENCE v. 10 11 No. C -12-02696 EDL TEQUISHA CURLEY, et al., Defendant. 12 / 13 At the second pretrial conference in this case on November 21, 2013, the Court ordered as 14 15 follows: 16 1. questionnaire. 17 18 No later than December 2, 2013, the parties shall provide a finalized copy of the juror 2. No later than the close of business on November 26, 2013, the parties shall provide a stipulation regarding Defendant’s net worth. 19 20 3. As stated at the pretrial conference, Defendant’s Motion in Limine number 11 is granted. 21 4. As stated at the pretrial conference, the parties will refrain from stating at trial that there was 22 an “Internal Affairs” investigation of the incident at issue. This resolves Defendant’s Motion 23 in Limine number 2. 24 5. Motion in Limine number 1. 25 26 No later than December 2, 2013, the parties shall provide a stipulation to resolve Plaintiff’s 6. Undersheriff Brin may testify in place of Captain Fisher if Brin provides a declaration 27 similar to that provided by Fisher, and Defendant makes Brin available for deposition by 28 Plaintiff before trial for approximately one hour. The parties are encouraged to stipulate to additional time for the deposition if appropriate. 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. 2 Dated: November 25, 2013 ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE United States Chief Magistrate Judge 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?