Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00218/USCOURTS-casd-3_07-cv-00218-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 1 - 07cv218

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRUCE THORNS,

Plaintiff,

CASE NO. 3:07-CV-00218-H-AJB

ORDER REGARDING

vs. PLAINTIFF’S EXHIBITS

S. RYAN, et al.,

Defendants.

A trial in this case is set for February 23, 2010. On February 22, 2010, the Court held

a status hearing in this case. Plaintiff is seeking to introduce various exhibits at trial, and

Defendants object to some of the exhibits. After hearing the argument, the Court:

• GRANTS Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 1 (“Report by Neal”). The

parties indicated that this Exhibit is withdrawn pursuant to a stipulation;

• GRANTS Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 4 (“Special Master’s Report’)

on the grounds of FRE 403, lack of foundation and hearsay;

• DENIES Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 6 (“Physicians’ Orders”);

• GRANTS Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 11 (“Memorandum by Ochoa

dated April 5, 2005") on the grounds of FRE 403, lack of foundation and hearsay;

• GRANTS Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 12 (“Plaintiff’s Declaration”)

on the grounds of FRE 403, lack of foundation and hearsay;

• DENIES Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 13 (“Report by Ruan”);

• GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 19

Case 3:07-cv-00218-H-AJB Document 138 Filed 02/23/10 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 - 07cv218

(“Letters re: 602 appeal”). The Court denies Defendants’ objections to the portion of

the Exhibit that includes letters authored by Plaintiff. The Court grants the objections

to the other documents on the grounds of hearsay and lack of foundation;

• GRANTS Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 24 (“Crime Incident Report

by Castillo””) on the grounds of lack of foundation and hearsay;

• GRANTS Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 25 (“Casillas’ Responses to

Requests for Admissions”). Plaintiff has indicated to the Court that he will not need

this Exhibit;

• GRANTS Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 26. Plaintiff has indicated to

the Court that he will not need this Exhibit;

• The Court GRANTS in part, DENIES in part and reserves its ruling with regard to

Plaintiff’s Exhibit 30 (“O’Connell’s Responses to Requests for Admissions”). The

Court grants objections with regard to the document. If appropriate, however,

Plaintiff may use portions of the document, depending on witness testimony, at trial.

• GRANTS Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 31 (“Crime Incident Reports

by Nieves, Limas, and Harmon”) on the grounds of lack of foundation and hearsay. 

This Exhibit will not come in subject to a showing of necessity at trial;

• GRANTS Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 32 (“Staff Reports”) subject to

further showing of necessity and relevance at trial;

• GRANTS Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 35 (“O’Connell’s Responses

to Interrogatories”). Plaintiff may use this evidence for impeachment purposes;

• GRANTS Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 38 (“Rules Violation

Report”). Parties have stipulated that plaintiff’s conviction was overturned, and

Plaintiff indicates that he will not need this Exhibit.

• DENIES Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 39 (“Medical Report by Lai”);

• GRANTS Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 40 (Affidavit by C. Trott”) on

the grounds of hearsay;

• GRANTS Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 41 (“Supplemental Page

Case 3:07-cv-00218-H-AJB Document 138 Filed 02/23/10 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 3 - 07cv218

Appeal Log”). Plaintiff may testify how he obtained the TV and radio;

• DENIES Defendants’ objections to Plaintiff’s Exhibit 42 (“Hearing Test”). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: February 23, 2010

________________________________

MARILYN L. HUFF, District Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 3:07-cv-00218-H-AJB Document 138 Filed 02/23/10 Page 3 of 3