Barajas Centeno v. City of Carlsbad

S.D. California

Barajas Centeno v. City of Carlsbad

DecidedJanuary 14, 2021

Docket3:19-cv-02098

StatusUnknown

This text of Barajas Centeno v. City of Carlsbad (Barajas Centeno v. City of Carlsbad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Barajas Centeno v. City of Carlsbad, (S.D. Cal. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSE LUIS BARAJAS CENTENO, Case No.: 3:19-cv-2098-L-DEB

12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 13 v. MOTION TO EXCLUDE EXPERT TESTIMONY 14 CITY OF CARLSBAD, et al.,

15 Defendants. [ECF No. 71]

16 17

18 19 Pending before the Court in this action alleging police use of excessive force 20 during arrest in violation of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988, and Cal. Civ. Code § 52.1 is 21 Plaintiff's motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 to exclude the testimony of 22 Philip L. Sanchez, Defendants’ designated expert. (Doc. no. 71.) Defendants filed an 23 opposition. (Doc. no. 81.) For the reasons which follow, Plaintiff’s motion is denied 24 without prejudice. 25 Plaintiff argues Mr. Sanchez is not qualified to render an opinion regarding 26 Plaintiff’s arrest and use of force and that his opinions are not supported as required by 27 Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 526 U.S. 137, 149 (1999), and its progeny. 28 Defendants dispute these contentions. 1 Plaintiff’s motion is denied without prejudice as premature. Plaintiff may 2 ||incorporate his Daubert arguments in his summary judgment briefing or present them in 3 ||a motion in limine filed after the final pretrial conference. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 6 ||Dated: January 14, 2021 : 1 fee fp 8 H . James Lorenz, 9 United States District Judge

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSE LUIS BARAJAS CENTENO, Case No.: 3:19-cv-2098-L-DEB

12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 13 v. MOTION TO EXCLUDE EXPERT TESTIMONY 14 CITY OF CARLSBAD, et al.,

15 Defendants. [ECF No. 71]

16 17

18 19 Pending before the Court in this action alleging police use of excessive force 20 during arrest in violation of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988, and Cal. Civ. Code § 52.1 is 21 Plaintiff's motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 702 to exclude the testimony of 22 Philip L. Sanchez, Defendants’ designated expert. (Doc. no. 71.) Defendants filed an 23 opposition. (Doc. no. 81.) For the reasons which follow, Plaintiff’s motion is denied 24 without prejudice. 25 Plaintiff argues Mr. Sanchez is not qualified to render an opinion regarding 26 Plaintiff’s arrest and use of force and that his opinions are not supported as required by 27 Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 526 U.S. 137, 149 (1999), and its progeny. 28 Defendants dispute these contentions. 1 Plaintiff’s motion is denied without prejudice as premature. Plaintiff may 2 ||incorporate his Daubert arguments in his summary judgment briefing or present them in 3 ||a motion in limine filed after the final pretrial conference. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 6 ||Dated: January 14, 2021 : 1 fee fp 8 H . James Lorenz, 9 United States District Judge

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Barajas Centeno v. City of Carlsbad, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barajas-centeno-v-city-of-carlsbad-casd-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack