Bradshaw v. Johanns

Opinion

UNlTED STA"l"ES DISTRICT COURT FOR 'l`HE DiS'i"RlCT OF COLUMBIA

RODNEY BRADSI*IAW, Plaintiff, V. Civil Action No. 04~1422 (PLF)

SONNY PER`DUB, Seeretary, United States Department of Agricuiture,

Dei"endant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

'l`liis matter is before the Court on Defend.ant’s Motion in Limine to Exclude Testimony Regarding Marl< l~lendrici

Because this Will be a bench trial, the Court need not make i"mal determinations on relevance, probative value, and prejudice until the trial itself or even after the conclusion ot` the trial. ln fairness to the plaintiff, therei"oi‘e, the Court Will not exclude testimony respecting plaintiffs conversations and interactions With Mai‘l< l-lendrici

the pendingr motion in limine. Aecordingiy, it is hereby

ORDERED that De'l"endant’s Motion in Limine [Dkt. No. 191] to Exclude Testimony Regarding Marl< Hendricl

SO ORDERED.

@Z<»J;b~_/

PAUL L. FRIEDMAN United States District Judge

DATE; hal 9.\\ {'/1