Chytka v. Wright Tree Service, Inc.
ORDER: Plaintiff may not present any witnesses other than herself at trial. Plaintiff may not present any exhibits at trial other than those already listed in the Final Pretrial Order. By Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 2/18/2014. (klyon, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 11-cv-00968-REB-KLM
WRIGHT TREE SERVICE, INC.,
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court on the Order [#350] issued by the Court on January
9, 2014. Therein, the Court ordered Plaintiff to do the following:
What Plaintiff Must Do If She Wants to Present Witnesses and
Exhibits at Trial
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff must do the following if she
wants to present witnesses and exhibits at trial:
On or before January 23, 2014, Plaintiff must file a Renewed
Motion to Amend Witness List. The motion must include an
explanation of the testimony to be given by each of the
witnesses already listed in the Final Pretrial Order.
On or before January 30, 2014, Plaintiff must file a Renewed
Motion to Amend Exhibit List, along with copies of each exhibit
she intends to present at trial. Each exhibit must have a
separate and unique name and must be separately numbered.
Plaintiff must identify which exhibits are already listed in the
Final Pretrial Order, and which exhibits have not been
provided to Defendant before.
Order [#350] at 5-6. The Court further clearly warned Plaintiff:
What Will Happen if Plaintiff Does Not Comply With the Court’s
Instructions in Section D. Above.
If Plaintiff does not properly and fully follow the steps outlined in
Section D.1 and D.2 above, the Court will strike her witnesses and strike
any of her exhibits not already listed in the Final Pretrial Order. If that
happens, Plaintiff will not be permitted to present any witnesses other than
herself at trial and will not be allowed to present any exhibits other than those
already listed in the Final Pretrial Order at trial.
Id. at 6.
Since the Court issued the above-quoted Order on January 9, 2014, Plaintiff has
made seven filings, dated between January 10, 2014 and February 12, 2014. See [#351,
#353, #355, #357, #360, #363, #366]. These documents have been uniformly addressed
to Chief Judge Krieger because Plaintiff has been unhappy with the course of her case,
although Plaintiff has been informed numerous times that such filings are inappropriate.
Moreover, these documents demonstrate that Plaintiff understood the above-quoted Order.
See, e.g., Motion [#351] at 6, 8 (“Manifested [sic] injustice by the Judges staying on this
case and stating they will strike any of my witnesses and strike any of I the Pro Se Plaintiffs
[sic] Exhibits not already listed shows violation of due process of the law and directing this
case in the Defendants [sic] favor. . . . . So why is I the Pro Se Plaintiffs [sic] Exhibit
Evidence so important to the Judges Mix and Blackburn now? Again show [sic] that
Judges Mix and Blackburn has [sic] something to gain or mental Issues.
Defendant can hide evidence and state that they will bring in other witnesses for rebuttal
and I the Pro Se Plaintiff is not going to be allowed the same. I should not have to file this
with the Court. Chief Judge Krieger will be making the Decision on this case.”).
Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court’s January 9, 2014 Order, in either a
timely or untimely manner. She has failed to seek an extension of time or clarification of
the Court’s Order. Thus, the sanctions about which Plaintiff was previously warned will be
imposed. See Order [#331]. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff may not present any witnesses other than
herself at trial.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff may not present any exhibits at trial other
than those already listed in the Final Pretrial Order.
Dated: February 18, 2014
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?