Jones v. Union Pacific Railroad Company

Filing 99

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER regarding pending motions. IT IS ORDERED: 1. The motions in limine (filings 76 , 80 ) shall be held in abeyance and not considered until the first day of trial during the pretrial conference which will be held in chambers imme diately prior to trial; 2. The motion to restrict pursuant to the E-Government Act (filing 78 ) is granted; 3. The motion for leave to file a supplemental brief (filing 88 ) is granted, and the supplemental brief (filing 90 ) shall be considered instanter; and 4. The motion to file a motion in limine out of time (filing 92 ) is granted and, due to the immediacy of trial, such motion shall be filed on or before 12:00 noon on January 8, 2009. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (JAB)

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA RUBY D. JONES, f/k/a RUBY D. WHITE, Plaintiff, vs. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 4:07CV3281

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

The parties in this case have filed motions in limine (filings 76, 80); a motion to restrict pursuant to the E-Government Act (filing 78); a motion for leave to file a supplemental brief regarding a motion in limine (filing 88); and a motion to file a motion in limine out of time (filing 92). Based on the nature of the motions in limine, the court shall defer consideration and disposition of such motions until the pretrial conference which will be held in chambers immediately prior to trial, which is currently scheduled to begin next week. Because there is no objection to the motion to restrict pursuant to the E-Government Act, such motion shall be granted. NECivR 5.3(c). Finally, a flurry of last-minute discovery disputes dictates that the motion for leave to file a supplemental brief regarding a motion in limine (filing 88) and the motion to file a motion in limine out of time (filing 92) should be granted. IT IS ORDERED: 1. The motions in limine (filings 76, 80) shall be held in abeyance and not considered until the first day of trial during the pretrial conference which will be held in chambers immediately prior to trial;

2. granted;

The motion to restrict pursuant to the E-Government Act (filing 78) is

3. The motion for leave to file a supplemental brief (filing 88) is granted, and the supplemental brief (filing 90) shall be considered instanter; and 4. The motion to file a motion in limine out of time (filing 92) is granted and, due to the immediacy of trial, such motion shall be filed on or before 12:00 noon on January 8, 2009. January 6, 2009. BY THE COURT: s/ Richard G. Kopf United States District Judge

-2-