Campbell v. National Passenger Railroad Corporation et al

Filing 179

ORDER re 153 MOTION in Limine filed by Joe Deely, National Passenger Railroad Corporation, 158 MOTION in Limine filed by John Earl Campbell, Motions terminated: 158 MOTION in Limine filed by John Earl Campbell, 153 MOTION in Limine filed by Joe Deely, National Passenger Railroad Corporation.. Signed by Judge Claudia Wilken on 2/2/09. (scc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/2/2009)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 No. 3: Exclude evidence of Plaintiff's prior misdemeanor No. 4: Exclude evidence of Plaintiff's dispute with Terry Province No. 5: Exclude "surprise witnesses" and testimony based on undisclosed documents or evidence Plaintiff's Motions in Limine: No. 1: Exclude evidence of Plaintiff's email address No. 2: Exclude evidence of unrelated train accidents and derailments Granted Denied, except that accidents must have resulted from rule violations similar to Plaintiff's Granted Granted Granted v. NATIONAL PASSENGER RAILROAD CORPORATION, et al., Defendants. / JOHN EARL CAMPBELL, Plaintiff, FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA No. C 05-5434 CW ORDER ON MOTIONS IN LIMINE IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

As explained at the final pre-trial conference on January 13, 2009, the Court rules on the parties' motions in limine as follows.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

No. 6: Exclude lay opinion regarding Plaintiff's prior accidents

Denied, provided witnesses establish that their training and experience qualifies them to present opinion testimony on the matters in question Granted1 Granted

No. 7: Exclude Plaintiff's prior race complaints No. 8: Exclude evidence of promotions of African-American employees outside the Pacific Division No. 9: Exclude evidence of promotions of African-American men for engineer training after August, 2004

Granted with respect to promotions that took place after Plaintiff filed his complaint of race discrimination only

Defendant's Motions in Limine: No. 1: Exclude evidence of racist comments Granted with respect to comments (2), (4) and (6); denied with respect to comments (1), (3), (5) and (7); ruling deferred with respect to other comments Plaintiff may seek to introduce at trial Denied; Defendant may attempt to persuade the jury that such employees were not similarly situated

No. 2: Exclude evidence of the treatment of other Amtrak employees who committed rule violations

The Court inadvertently failed to inform the parties at the hearing that this motion was granted. 2

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

No. 3: Exclude "sham statistical evidence"

Granted, except that if Defendant introduces non-expert testimony on African-American employees promoted to or serving in certain positions, Plaintiff may rebut with similar evidence Granted with respect to Plaintiff's previous applications for engineer positions; denied with respect to Plaintiff's previous rule violations Granted

No. 4: Exclude "time-barred events"

No. 5:2 Exclude surreptitious audiotape recording IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 2/2/09

CLAUDIA WILKEN United States District Judge

Defendant's papers refer to this motion as "No. 6," but there are only five motions. 3

2