Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04480/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04480-14/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

MOTION TO PERMIT SIX MOTIONS IN LIMINE n:\lit\li2006\070184\00447967.doc 

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

DENNIS J. HERRERA, State Bar #139669

City Attorney 

JOANNE HOEPER, State Bar #114961

Chief Trial Deputy 

SCOTT D. WIENER, State Bar #189266 

MEREDITH OSBORN, State Bar #250467

Deputy City Attorneys 

Fox Plaza 

1390 Market Street, 6th Floor 

San Francisco, California 94102-5408 

Telephone: (415) 554-4283 

Facsimile: (415) 554-3837 

Attorneys for Defendants 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

HAKIM MUHAMMAD; JOSHUA 

MILLER; BRANDON BIRKS; AND 

STACY RICHARDSON, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 vs. 

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO, a governmental entity; 

HEATHER FONG, in her capacity as 

Chief of Police for the CITY AND 

COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO; 

SHERMAN LEE, JESSE FARRELL, 

DAVID RODRIGUEZ, ERICK 

ANDERSON, DAVID BATCHELDER, 

AJAY SINGH, PATRICK 

MCCORMICK, STEPHEN COLEMAN, 

and ANTHONY MONTOYA, 

individually, and in their capacity as 

police officers for CITY AND COUNTY 

OF SAN FRANCISCO; and, DOES 10 

through 25, inclusive, 

 Defendants. 

Case No. C06-4480 JSW (JL) 

DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO PERMIT 

THE FILING OF SIX MOTIONS IN 

LIMINE 

Date Action Filed: July 24, 2006 

Trial Date: January 14, 2008 

Muhammad, et al. v. CCSF, et al. – USDC No. C06-4480 JSW

Case 3:06-cv-04480-JSW Document 77 Filed 11/20/2007 Page 1 of 2 Case 3:06-cv-04480-JSW Document 94 Filed 11/27/07 Page 1 of 2
MOTION TO PERMIT SIX MOTIONS IN LIMINE n:\lit\li2006\070184\00447967.doc 

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

The Court's pretrial preparation order indicates that five motions in limine are typically 

sufficient and that leave of court is required to file more than five. Defendants have carefully culled 

down the number of motions in limine to six. Each of the six motions in limine is significant, and 

Defendants therefore request leave for consideration of all six. 

Dated: November 20, 2007 

DENNIS J. HERRERA 

City Attorney 

JOANNE HOEPER 

Chief Trial Deputy 

SCOTT D. WIENER 

MEREDITH OSBORN 

Deputy City Attorneys 

 -/s/- Scott D. Wiener 

By: 

SCOTT D. WIENER 

Attorneys for Defendants 

Muhammad, et al. v. CCSF, et al. – USDC No. C06-4480 JSW

Case 3:06-cv-04480-JSW Document 77 Filed 11/20/2007 Page 2 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Jeffrey S. White

Dated: November 27, 2007

Case 3:06-cv-04480-JSW Document 94 Filed 11/27/07 Page 2 of 2