Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00129/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-00129-7/pdf.json

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

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THERESA HOLBROOK KRAFT, et al.,

Plaintiffs, No. CIV S-04-0129 GGH 

vs.

SHANNON LANEY, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiffs have filed objections to the pretrial order issued in this case. The court

rules as follows.

1. Plaintiffs have until September 23, 2005 in which to file a reply to the

opposition concerning its motion to exclude Timothy Albertson, M.D. as a witness.

2. If the only defendants in this case were individuals, the court would deny

plaintiffs’ request to change the statement of the deliberate indifference claim in the pretrial

order. At the very least, individuals would have a qualified immunity to any definition of

deliberate indifference outside that of the Eighth Amendment in that any such new definition

would not be clearly established law. However, because this case involves an entity as well, the

court will take plaintiffs’ objection under submission. The parties are directed to address this

issue in any trial brief and/or objections to jury instructions. 

Case 2:04-cv-00129-GGH Document 140 Filed 09/20/05 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

2

3. Motions-in-limine are to be briefed as follows: 

Moving party’s motions to be filed by October 7, 2005; oppositions are due no

later than October 14, 2005. No replies shall be filed. If necessary, the court will hold argument

on the first day of trial either before or after jury selection. 

With the exception of Daubert issues, the parties shall not file motions-in-limine

which they should know will require an evidentiary foundation at trial in any event. Rather, any

such problems shall be raised after the foundation is presented, or the lack thereof. The court

would appreciate a “heads–up” for any such issues in the trial briefs. 

DATED: 9/19/05

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

_______________________________

 GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

 U. S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:gh

kraft0129.ord

Case 2:04-cv-00129-GGH Document 140 Filed 09/20/05 Page 2 of 2