McLeod v. City of Redding

District Court, E.D. California·Decided July 3, 2024·No. 2:22-cv-00585·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ----oo0oo----

VERONICA MCLEOD, individually No. 2:22-cv-00585 WBS JDP and as successor in interest to decedent, DOLORES HERNANDEZ; AMADO HERNANADEZ; individually and as successor in interest to decedent, DOLORES HERNANDEZ; and YSIDRA REGALDO, individually, FINAL PRETRIAL ORDER Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF REDDING; GARRETT MAXWELL, an individual; MATTHEW BRUCE, an individual; and DOES 2-10, inclusive,

Defendants. ----oo0oo---- A Final Pretrial Conference was held in this matter, pursuant to the provisions of Rule 16(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 282, on July 1, 2024. Stewart Katz appeared as counsel for plaintiffs and Dale L. Allen, Jr., appeared as counsel for defendants.1 Following the conference, the court enters this Final Pretrial Order: I. Jurisdiction – Venue Jurisdiction is predicated upon 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343(a), because plaintiffs assert a claim for violation of constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367, the court has supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ state law claims, which arise from the same course of conduct as plaintiffs’ federal claims. Venue is undisputed and is hereby found to be proper. II. Jury – Non-Jury All parties have demanded a jury trial. Accordingly, the action shall be tried, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 48, before a jury consisting of six to nine jurors, and the jury must be unanimous. The parties have agreed that the court shall select nine jurors. III. Statement of Case, Jury Instructions, and Proposed Form of Verdict No later than twenty-one days before the trial date, the parties shall submit a joint statement of the case to be read to the jury. No later than twenty-one days before the trial date, counsel for plaintiffs shall lodge and serve, pursuant to Local Rule 163, copies of all jury instructions that plaintiffs request be given on plaintiffs’ claims. At that time, counsel 1 As discussed in the court’s summary judgment order (Docket No. 39 at 5-6), Officers Bruce and Maxwell are the only remaining defendants because plaintiffs have abandoned their municipal liability claims. for plaintiffs shall also file and serve a copy of a proposed form of verdict. No later than fourteen days before the trial date, counsel for defendants shall file and serve any objections to the instructions proposed by plaintiffs. At the same time, counsel for defendants shall lodge and serve, pursuant to Local Rule 163, copies of any and all jury instructions not already proposed by plaintiffs, which defendants request be given. Also at that time, counsel for defendants shall file and serve a copy of any proposed form of verdict and shall also file any objections to plaintiffs’ proposed form of verdict. No later than seven days before the trial date, counsel for plaintiffs shall file and serve any objections to the instructions proposed by defendants and to any proposed form of verdict. Pursuant to Local Rule 163, any other instructions thereafter presented will be refused unless it is shown either: (1) that the necessity for the request arose in the course of trial; could not reasonably have been anticipated prior to trial from the pleadings, discovery or nature of the action; and the request for such additional instructions is presented to the court as promptly as possible; or (2) that the refusal to give such instructions would constitute plain error. Likewise, any objections to proposed instructions not made in accordance with this order will be overruled as untimely unless it is shown either: (1) that the grounds therefor arose in the course of trial and the intention to make such objections is communicated to the court as promptly as possible, or (2) that the giving of such instructions would constitute plain error. IV. Voir Dire Questions No later than fourteen days before the trial date, counsel for each party shall submit all proposed jury voir dire questions they wish to have the court ask the jury. The court will conduct the jury voir dire. Thereafter, each side shall have 20 minutes for voir dire by counsel. V. Trial Briefs No later than fourteen days before the trial date, counsel for each party shall file trial briefs, which shall include any motions in limine, pursuant to Local Rule 285. VI. Remaining Claims2 Plaintiffs’ claims for trial consist of the following: (1) Fourth Amendment Unreasonable Detention and Arrest under 42 U.S.C. § 1983; (2) State Law Battery by a Peace Officer (wrongful death); (3) State Law Negligence by a Peace Officer (wrongful death); and (4) Violation of California Civil Code Section 52.1 (Tom Bane Act). VII. Witnesses (A) Plaintiffs anticipate calling the witnesses identified at Exhibit “A” attached hereto. (B) Defendants anticipate calling the witnesses identified at Exhibit “B”, attached hereto. (C) Except for retained experts, each party may call 2 It is agreed that no interlocutory appeal of the court’s summary judgment order will be taken. any witness designated by any other party. (D) No other witnesses will be permitted to testify at trial unless: (1) all parties stipulate that the witness may testify; (2) the party offering the witness demonstrates that the witness is for the purpose of rebutting evidence which could not have been reasonably anticipated at the time of the Pretrial Conference; or (3) the witness was discovered after the Pretrial Conference. (E) Testimony of a witness not designated in this Order, which is offered under paragraph VII(D)(3), above, upon the grounds that the witness was discovered after the Pretrial Conference, will not be permitted unless: (1) the testimony of the witness could not reasonably have been discovered prior to the Pretrial Conference; (2) the court and opposing counsel were promptly notified upon discovery of the testimony; and (3) counsel proffered the witness for deposition if time permitted or provided all opposing counsel a reasonable summary of the testimony if time did not permit a deposition. VIII. Exhibits (A) Plaintiffs intend to offer the exhibits identified at Exhibit “C” attached hereto. (B) Defendants intend to offer the exhibits identified at Exhibit “D”, attached hereto. (C) Each party may offer any exhibit designated by any other party. (D) No other exhibits will be received in evidence unless: (1) all parties stipulate that the exhibit may be received in evidence; (2) the party offering the exhibit demonstrates that the exhibit is for the purpose of rebutting evidence which could not have been reasonably anticipated at the time of the Pretrial Conference; or (3) the exhibit was discovered after the Pretrial Conference. (E) An exhibit not designated in this Order, which is offered under paragraph VIII(D)(3), above, upon the grounds that the exhibit was discovered after the Pretrial Conference, will not be received in evidence unless: (1) the exhibit could not reasonably have been discovered prior to the Pretrial Conference; (2) the court and opposing counsel were promptly notified upon discovery of the exhibit; and (3) counsel provided copies of the exhibit to all opposing counsel if physically possible or made the exhibit reasonably available for inspection by all opposing counsel if copying was not phy

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

McLeod v. City of Redding, (E.D. Cal. 2024).

McLeod v. City of Redding (McLeod v. City of Redding) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
509 U.S. 579 (Supreme Court, 1993)
Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael
526 U.S. 137 (Supreme Court, 1999)