Franchina v. City of Providence

Filing 64

ORDER granting in part and denying in part 60 Motion in Limine. So Ordered by Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. on 1/27/2025. (Jackson, Ryan)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND LORI FRANCHINA, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF PROVIDENCE, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) C.A. No. 21-342-JJM-LDA ORDER Defendant’s Motion in Limine (ECF No. 60) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows: (1) As to the facts surrounding the underlying discrimination case, the Plaintiff is allowed to put forth evidence of what the Board members knew about the facts and findings of the underlying case–including public reports. This is relevant to the issue of notice to the Board because a jury must consider whether the underlying suit played a part in its decision. It may also be used to show the Board’s changing rationale for the denial of benefits. That said, any attempt to relitigate the facts of the original case, will not be allowed–the facts of the underlying case are relevant only if, and how they were considered by any Board member. (2) The Court does not see, considering the above, how the testimony of Olayinka Oredugba or Jeffrey Almeida about the complaints made to the EEO office by Ms. Franchina, or the investigation into them are relevant, and therefore they will not be allowed to testify. (3) Similarly, the Court does not see how Danielle Masse’s testimony is relevant here and therefore she may not testify. (4) Testimony of an undisclosed expert will not be allowed. (5) Complete testimony from Ms. Franchina’s treating doctors, as far as it supports her claim for emotional distress, will be allowed. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/John J. McConnell, Jr. _________________________________ John J. McConnell, Jr. Chief Judge United States District Court January 27, 2025

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?