Finnie v. Lee County, Mississippi et al

Filing 99

ORDER granting in part, denying in part, deferring in part 88 Motion in Limine. Signed by District Judge Sharion Aycock on 7/13/2012. (kmc)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI EASTERN DIVISION CRYSTAL N. FINNIE PLAINTIFF CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:10cv64-SA-DAS v. LEE COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI and JIM H. JOHNSON, SHERIFF OF LEE COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI, In His Official Capacity DEFENDANTS ORDER With regard to the motions in limine [88] presently pending in the above-entitled action, the Court rules as follows: 1. Defendants’ first motion in limine to exclude religious references will be granted in part and denied in part. The motion is granted to the extent counsel makes improper religious references that “are [not] probative of an issue raised at trial” and/or that “indicate that the jury should consider the teachings or beliefs of [a] diety or any religious references in addition to or to the exclusion of law.” Whitfield v. Harris, 474 F. Supp. 2d 822, 825 (N.D. Miss. 2008). 2. Defendants’ second motion in limine seeks to exclude evidence of Plaintiff’s prior work record. The Court does not know what information, if any, Plaintiff seeks to introduce at trial, or for what purpose(s) such information would be used. The Court, therefore, currently denies Defendants’ motion in limine. Yet, the Court notes that it will entertain the issue upon a timely objection made by Defendants’ counsel at trial. 3. Defendants’ third motion in limine seeks a court instruction regarding Plaintiffs’ religious discrimination claim. The Court defers ruling on this motion until trial, at which time the Court will hear arguments on the issue from the parties. So ordered on this, the _13th__ day of ___July______, 2012. /s/ Sharion Aycock UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?