Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00718/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-00718-20/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1343 Violation of 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

On May 23, 2014, Plaintiff filed a “Motion in Limine For Clerical Clarification of Second 

Amended Complaint” (hereinafter, Plaintiff’s “Motion”). Doc # 152. The primary purpose of 

Plaintiff’s Motion is to clarify Plaintiff’s intentions with regard to the scope of Defendant’s 

conduct that constitutes the alleged infringement of Plaintiff’s rights under the First Amendment 

and therefore should inform the jury’s consideration of damages. It is the court’s understanding, 

based on Plaintiff’s Motion and on comments made during the hearing on motions in limine, that 

it is Plaintiff contends that all the negative interactions between Plaintiff and Defendant, including 

those that were described in Plaintiff’s first and second claims for relief that have been dismissed, 

are all examples of retaliation by Defendant against Plaintiff motivated by Plaintiff’s exercise of 

his free speech rights. It is therefore Plaintiff’s contention that both evidence of both retaliation 

and damage are to be found in Defendant’s actions regarding Plaintiff that both predate and 

postdate the city council meeting of May 7, 2008.

Although Plaintiff’s motion also requests clarification of rulings during the hearing on a 

number of motions in limine and seeks reconsideration of the court’s refusal to disqualify itself 

EUGENE FORTE,

Plaintiff

v.

TOMMY JONES,

Defendant.

CASE NO. 1:11-CV-0718 AWI-BAM 

ORDER SETTING DATE FOR 

DEFENDANT’S REPSONSE TO 

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION IN LIMINE, 

DOCUMENT NUMBER 152

Case 1:11-cv-00718-AWI-BAM Document 154 Filed 05/28/14 Page 1 of 2
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

from the proceedings, the court requests that Defendant not address these issues and confine any 

further briefing to the issue mentioned in the first paragraph of this order.

It is hereby ORDERED that Defendant may file and serve any response to the issue 

discussed in the first paragraph of this order not later than 5:00 p.m. Thursday, May 29, 2014. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 27, 2014 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:11-cv-00718-AWI-BAM Document 154 Filed 05/28/14 Page 2 of 2