Walker v. Washington, et al
Filing
79
RULING Pltf is barred from producing any witness, other than himself, at trial. Signed by Chief Judge Ralph E. Tyson on 5/3/2011. (JDL)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
ANTHONY WALKER
(#110316)
CIVIL ACTION
VERSUS
MSGT. WILLIE WASHINGTON, ET AL
NO. 03-843-C
RULING
On April 19, 2010, this Court held a final pre-trial conference in the instant
matter. During the pre-trial conference, the Court ordered the parties to file,
among other things, a final will-call witness list no later than February 7, 2011.
Notice to Counsel was filed into the record immediately after the pre-trial
conference.1 The Notice specifically stated that a “[f]inal will call witness list shall be
filed not later than February 7, 2011.”2
On February 7, 2011, the Defendants complied with the order, filing
proposed voir dire questions, proposed jury charges, a witness list, and a Motion
in Limine. As of the date of this Ruling, Plaintiff has yet to file a will-call witness
list.
District courts have discretion in selecting a sanction to impose for the
disregard of its orders.3 Although this court may dismiss this action sua sponte,4
1
Record Document No. 71, Minute Entry / Notice to Counsel.
2
Id.
3
Brinkmann v. Dallas Cnty. Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.1987) (citing
National Hockey League v. Metropolitan Hockey Club, Inc., 427 U.S. 639, 96 S.Ct. 2778,
the Court feels as though a lesser sanction is warranted. Trial on the matter is
scheduled to begin within one week, and Plaintiff has delayed filing its final willcall witness list for over a year. Plaintiff has violated this Court’s order, and
therefore, plaintiff is barred from producing any witness, other than himself, at
trial.
Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons assigned,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff is barred from producing any witness, other
than himself, at trial.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this 3rd day of May, 2011.
7
RALPH E. TYSON, CHIEF JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
2780, 49 L.Ed.2d 747 (1976)).
4
Brinkmann, 813 F.2d 744 (affirming dismissal based on pro se litigant's failure to serve
a witness list); see also Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31, 82 S.Ct. 1386,
1388-89, 8 L.Ed.2d 734 (1962).
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?