Preece v. The Covenant Presbyterian Church

Filing 85

ORDER granting the defendant's 76 Motion in Limine. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Thomas D. Thalken. (MKR)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

RICHARD JEREMIAH PREECE, an
Individual,
8:13CV188
Plaintiff,
vs.

ORDER

THE COVENANT PRESBYTERIAN
CHURCH, a Nebraska non-profit
domestic corporation,
Defendant.
This matter is before the court on the defendant’s Motion in Limine (Filing No.
76). The defendant filed a brief (Filing No. 78) and index of evidence (Filing No. 77) in
support of the motion. The plaintiff did not respond to the motion.
The plaintiff is asserting claims against the defendant for: 1) discrimination on
the basis of sex, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1967, as Amended, 42
U.S.C. § 2000e-2, et seq. (Title VII), and the Nebraska Fair Employment Practices Act,
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-1101, et seq. (NFEPA); 2) discrimination on the basis of his marital
status, in violation of the NFEPA; and 3) retaliation in violation of Title VII and the
NFEPA. See Filing No. 1 - Complaint. As relevant to the instant motion, the underlying
basis of the plaintiff’s sex discrimination claim is that the defendant’s Executive Pastor,
Jeremy Grant (Pastor Grant), allegedly subjected the plaintiff to uninvited physical
contact and suggestive emails, calls, and messages on a number of occasions. The
plaintiff alleges the defendant terminated him in July 2012 due to his sex, marital status,
and in retaliation for his complaints about Pastor Grant. Id. The defendant generally
denies the plaintiff’s allegations. See Filing No. 13 - Answer.
In the instant motion, the defendant seeks to preclude speculative testimony from
the plaintiff on three topics: 1) the plaintiff’s testimony about what the defendant’s
Human Resources Team or the Executive Pastor would have done had it received
certain information; 2) the plaintiff’s testimony about an allegedly drugged drink; and 3)
the plaintiff’s testimony about what he thinks is the reason his predecessor was
terminated. See Filing No. 78 - Brief §§ I, III, and IV. The defendant also seeks to

preclude improper character evidence about Pastor Grant. Id. § II. Upon consideration,
and in light of the fact the plaintiff has not opposed the motion,

IT IS ORDERED:
The defendant’s Motion in Limine (Filing No. 76) is granted.

Dated this 12th day of March, 2015.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Thomas D. Thalken
United States Magistrate Judge

2