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