Percelle v. Pearson et al
Filing
308
ORDER Rescheduling Trial; Resetting Deadlines. Parties must meet and confer on new trial date and submit revised joint statement. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 11/19/15. (tehlc1S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/19/2015)
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
4
STEVE DALE PERCELLE,
Plaintiff,
5
6
7
8
v.
STEVEN PEARSON, et al.,
Case No. 12-cv-05343-TEH
ORDER RESCHEDULING TRIAL;
RESETTING DEADLINES
Defendants.
9
10
The trial in this case was scheduled for November 3, 2015. On November 19, 2015,
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
during the pretrial conference, it became clear to the Court based on the parties’ failure to
12
timely meet and confer as ordered, the disjointed 91 pages of pretrial documents (not
13
including motions in limine), and verbose oral argument, that the parties were not prepared
14
to begin an orderly trial within two weeks.
15
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties shall meet and confer on a new trial
16
date and shall discuss their proposed dates with this Court’s courtroom deputy. Once the
17
parties agree on a date that is available on the Court’s calendar, the Court will issue an
18
order setting the new trial date and a new pretrial conference date.
19
The parties may not submit any new motions in limine, as the filing deadline had
20
passed prior to the pre-trial conference. The parties may submit outstanding oppositions to
21
existing motions in limine, but must do so no later than November 26, 2015.
22
23
The only remaining cause of action in this case is a First Amendment Retaliation
claim within the prison context. The elements of the cause of action are as follows:
24
(1) That Defendant took some adverse action against Plaintiff
25
(2) Because of
26
(3) Plaintiff’s protected conduct;
27
(4) Such action chilled the exercise of Plaintiff’s First Amendment rights; and
28
(5) The action did not reasonably advance a legitimate correctional goal.
1
With only these elements in mind, the parties shall submit a revised joint pretrial
2
conference statement no later than 10 calendar days before the new pretrial conference
3
date, as determined by the parties’ agreement. The contents of the revised statement shall
4
adhere to the Order for Pretrial Preparation (Docket No. 168), with the following
5
exception:
6
The parties’ witness lists must contain an explanation outlining (1) the matters to
7
which each witness will testify, and (2) precisely how such testimony relates to one or
8
more of the elements of a First Amendment Retaliation claim.
9
The Court reminds the parties that the resetting of dates and deadlines does not give
the parties a second bite at the apple. There shall be no new witnesses, exhibits or other
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California
10
evidence in the revised joint pretrial statement, but rather the revision shall serve to clean
12
up and refocus the parties on the actual issues at bar. The Court will only find evidence
13
relevant under Federal Rule of Evidence 401 if it relates to the cause of action at issue.
14
Furthermore, the Court will liberally apply Federal Rule of Evidence 403 to ensure
15
that even relevant evidence will not be admitted if it will confuse the issues, mislead the
16
jury, needlessly present cumulative evidence or otherwise waste the Court’s time.
17
18
IT IS SO ORDERED.
19
20
21
Dated: 11/19/15
_____________________________________
THELTON E. HENDERSON
United States District Judge
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?