BURLINGTON v. NEWS CORPORATION et al

Filing 139

ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS MOTION IN LIMINE (DOC. NO. 89 ) IS DENIED. DEFENDANTS MOTION IN LIMINE (DOC. NO. 88 ) IS DENIED. DEFENDANTS MOTION IN LIMINE (DOC. NO. 87 ) IS DENIED. PLAINTIFFS MOTION IN LIMINE (DOC. NO.S 33 , 85 ) IS GRANTED. DEFENADNTS MOTION IN LIMINE (DOC. NO. 39 ) IS DENIED. DEFENDANTS MOTION IN LIMINE (DOC. NO. 38 ) IS DENIED. (DOC. NO. 37 ) IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART AS OUTLINED HEREIN. PLAINTIFFS MOTION IN LIMINE (DOC. NO. 34 , 35 , 84 ) WILL BE DENIED. PLAINTIFFS MOTION IN LIMINE (DOC. NO. 86 ) WILL BE DENIED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE R. BARCLAY SURRICK ON 5/27/2015. 5/28/2015 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E-MAILED AND FAXED.(sg, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

THOMAS BURLINGTON
v.
NEWS CORPORATION, ET AL.

:
:
:
:
:

CIVIL ACTION
NO. 09-1908

ORDER
AND NOW, this

27th day of May, 2015, upon consideration of various Motions in

Limine filed by Plaintiff (ECF Nos. 33, 34, 35, 84, 85, 86) and by Defendants (ECF Nos. 37, 38,
39, 87, 88, 89), and all documents submitted in support thereof, and in opposition thereto, it is
ORDERED as follows:
1.

Defendants’ Motion in Limine To Exclude References To Racial Bias of NonSupervisory Co-Workers Or Reliance On The “Cat’s Paw” Theory Of Liability
(ECF No. 89), is DENIED.

2.

Defendants’ Motion in Limine To Exclude Any References To The Use Of The
Word “N-GG-R” By Non-Similarly Situated Employee John Jervay (ECF No.
88), is DENIED.

3.

Defendants’ Motion in Limine to Exclude Any Reference To The Alleged Use Of
The Word “N-gg-r” By Non-Similarly Situated Employee Joyce Evans (ECF No.
87), is DENIED.

4.

Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine to Exclude February 9, 2009 EEOC Determination
(ECF Nos. 33, 85), is GRANTED.

5.

Defendants’ Motion in Limine To Preclude Testimony Regarding Plaintiff’s
Claim for Damages (ECF No. 39), is DENIED.

6.

Defendants’ Motion in Limine To Preclude Testimony Of Steve Dickstein, Steve
Sheinen And Bethann Jacobski (ECF No. 38), is DENIED.

7.

Defendants’ Motion in Limine To Exclude Any References To A Lawsuit Filed
Seven Years Ago By Richard Noonan Against Fox Television Stations of
Philadlephia, Inc. And The Alleged Use Of The Word “N-gg-r” Years Ago By A
Non-Similarly Situated Former Employee, David Huddleston (ECF No. 37), is
GRANTED in part, and DENIED in part, as follows:
A.

Defendants’ request to exclude references to David Huddleston’s use of
the word “n-gg-r” is DENIED.

B.

Defendants’ request to exclude reference to the Noonan action is
GRANTED in part, and DENIED in part. Plaintiff is permitted to
introduce into evidence Joyce Evans’s testimony from the Noonan action,
in which she discusses her comments to management about the racial
composition of the news team. Plaintiff will not be permitted to offer any
other evidence regarding the Noonan action at trial.

2

8.

Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine to Exclude Evidence Of His Termination from
WHTM in 1999 And 2003 Lawsuit against WHTM (ECF Nos. 34, 35, 84), will be
GRANTED.

9.

Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine To Preclude Evidence Of Plaintiff’s Lawsuit Against
Daily News (ECF No. 86), will be DENIED, in accordance with the
accompanying Memorandum.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT:

_________________________
R. BARCLAY SURRICK, J.

3