Filing 78

ORDER allowing amended exhibit lists and striking plaintiff's exhibit 96. Signed by JUDGE ROBERT L HINKLE on 1/28/17. (RH)

Download PDF
Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PANAMA CITY DIVISION STACEY BURKE, Plaintiff, v. CASE NO. 5:16cv90-RH/CAS MEGAN J. BRENNAN, in her official capacity as POSTMASTER UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, Defendant. ________________________________/ ORDER ALLOWING AMENDED EXHIBIT LISTS AND STRIKING PLAINTIFF’S EXHIBIT 96 This order confirms the ruling set out on the record of the hearing on January 26, 2017. The order also addresses the plaintiff’s amended exhibit list, ECF No. 76, and the defendant’s notice in response, ECF No. 77. IT IS ORDERED: 1. The parties’ agreement to supplement their exhibit lists with specific exhibits is approved. The lists are deemed properly amended to include the agreed exhibits. Case No. 5:16cv90-RH/GRJ Page 2 of 2 2. The plaintiff’s exhibit 96—“[d]eposition transcripts for all persons deposed in this case and any exhibit appended thereto to the extent permitted under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure”—is struck. 1 SO ORDERED on January 28, 2017. s/Robert L. Hinkle United States District Judge 1 Admissible deposition testimony that was timely disclosed under paragraph 4 of the Pretrial Order may be published, but a transcript will not be admitted into evidence. In addition, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(3) and the Order for Pretrial Conference, ECF No. 31, required exhibits to be specifically listed. There is no exception for a document that was attached to a deposition. Case No. 5:16cv90-RH/GRJ

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?