Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-01202/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cv-01202-19/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act

---

JOINT EXHIBIT LIST AND OBJECTIONS

CASE NO. 15-CV-01202 DMR

1 \\candoak.cand.circ9.dcn\data\users\dmrall\_cv\2015\2015_01202_

lawman_v_city_and_county_of_san_francisco\15-cv-01202-dmrdraft_order_with_rulings_on_objs_to_exhibits_080816.docx

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

Joseph S. May SBN 245924 

LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH S. MAY 

1388 Sutter Street, Suite 810 

San Francisco, CA 94109 

Tel: (415) 781-3333 

Fax: (415) 707-6600 

joseph@josephmaylaw.com 

DENNIS J. HERRERA, State Bar #139669

City Attorney

CHERYL ADAMS, State Bar #164194

Chief Trial Deputy

REBECCA BERS, State Bar #287111

JAMES HANNAWALT, State Bar #139657

Deputy City Attorneys

Fox Plaza

1390 Market Street, Sixth Floor

San Francisco, California 94102-5408

Telephone: (415) 554-4224

Facsimile: (415) 554-3837

E-Mail: rebecca.bers@sfgov.org

David M. Helbraun SBN 129840 

HELBRAUN LAW FIRM 

353 Sacramento Street, Suite 1140 

San Francisco, CA 94111 

Tel. (415) 982-4000 

Fax: (415) 986-1231

dmh@helbraunlaw.com

Attorneys for Defendants

City and County of San Francisco, Phillip M. 

Gordon, Glen Paul Minioza

Attorneys for Plaintiff GARY RICHARD 

LAWMAN by and through his Guardian ad Litem 

Richard de Villiers

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

GARY RICHARD LAWMAN by and through 

his Guardian ad Litem Richard de Villiers,

Plaintiff,

vs.

CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN 

FRANCISCO, PHILLIP M. GORDON; GLEN 

PAUL MINIOZA; BRIAN W. KNEUKER; 

CARLOS GUTIERREZ; CRAIG F. TOM; 

PATRICK F. PENE; JULIO C. PALENCIA; 

ANDREW N. BROWN; PAUL E. 

RAPACAVOLI; MATTHEW M. O’SHEA; 

MICHAEL HENNESSEY; GREG SUHR; 

ROEL L. LAPITAN; FRANK LATKO a.k.a. 

FRANZI LATKO; and DOES 1 through 50, 

inclusive,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-CV-01202 DMR

ORDER RE OBJECTIONS TO

TRIAL EXHIBITS

Trial Date: August 9, 2016

Case 4:15-cv-01202-DMR Document 227 Filed 08/08/16 Page 1 of 14
JOINT EXHIBIT LIST AND OBJECTIONS

CASE NO. 15-CV-01202 DMR

2 \\candoak.cand.circ9.dcn\data\users\dmrall\_cv\2015\2015_01202_

lawman_v_city_and_county_of_san_francisco\15-cv-01202-dmrdraft_order_with_rulings_on_objs_to_exhibits_080816.docx

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 rulings on the parties’ objections to trial exhibits are set forth below. It is the 

parties’ responsibility to seek admission of exhibits into evidence during the trial.

PLAINTIFF’S EXHIBIT LIST

Description [Purpose] Sponsoring 

Witness

Defendant’s 

Objection

Ruling on Objections

1

CCSF’s Supp. Response to 

Plaintiff’s 1st Set of Special 

Interrogatories (excerpts)

[CCSF’s claimed factual basis 

for probable cause]

CCSF

2

CCSF’s Response to 

Plaintiff’s 1st Set of Requests 

for Admission [establishes 

Plaintiff was unable to answer 

Officer Gordon’s questions]

CCSF

3

Photos of Four Seasons 

[location of arrest; gives jury 

context]

Rodie/ Flores

Object to photos with 

people in them

Overruled, but 

Plaintiff must blur 

faces

4

Video of Four Seasons 

residence lounge [location of 

arrest; gives jury context]

Rodie/ Flores

5

911 call [does not report that 

Mr. Lawman was an 

“intoxicated trespasser”]

Flores

6

911 call transcript [see 

Exhibit 5] Flores

7

Radio traffic (3 recordings)

[no mention of Mr. Lawman 

being “intoxicated”]

CCSF

8

CAD report [shows that 

Officer Gordon was not 

dispatched to the Four 

Seasons regarding an 

“intoxicated trespasser”]

Gordon

9 WITHDRAWN

10 WITHDRAWN

11

Public Intoxication Report, 

Dec., 31, 2011 [if admissible, 

shows Gordon’s purported 

observations]

Gordon

12 Field Arrest Card [evidence 

of 647(f) arrest] Gordon

Object to this 

document as 

incomplete. Page 

CCSF-8 (the reverse 

Overruled. Plaintiff’s 

Exhibit currently 

includes CCSF-8.

Case 4:15-cv-01202-DMR Document 227 Filed 08/08/16 Page 2 of 14
JOINT EXHIBIT LIST AND OBJECTIONS

CASE NO. 15-CV-01202 DMR

3 \\candoak.cand.circ9.dcn\data\users\dmrall\_cv\2015\2015_01202_

lawman_v_city_and_county_of_san_francisco\15-cv-01202-dmrdraft_order_with_rulings_on_objs_to_exhibits_080816.docx

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

side of the card) is 

excluded

13 Booking Card [evidence of 

647(f) arrest] Gordon

14

County Jail 1 Sobering Cell 

Observation Record [shows 

vague observation by jail and 

nursing staff]

CCSF

15 Triage Note Latko

16

County Jail 1: Cell Housing 

History [shows length of stay 

in sobering cell for Plaintiff 

and Michael Moracha]

CCSF

17

POST Learning Domain 37, 

Chapter 4 [SFPD training], 

Bates Nos. 915, 919, 921, 

941-948, 1015-1052

CCSF/ Gordon

As to Bates 915, 919, 

921, and 941-948, 

Plaintiff did not 

include these pages in 

the exhibit binders. 

However, Defendants 

intend to admit this 

portion of POST LD 

37, and therefore do 

not object to this late 

addition to Plaintiff’s 

Exhibit List. 

As to Bates 1015-

1048, Defendants 

object pursuant to FRE 

402, 403 because this 

Chapter is a detailed 

training on 5150, and 

contains no other 

information that could 

be relevant to 

plaitniff’s case. See

Defendant’s MIL No. 

3 (Dkt. 150). Even if 

the Court permits 

some questioning

regarding training as it 

relates to 5150, this 33 

page chapter on the 

topic is irrelevant, 

duplicative, confusing, 

and prejudicial to 

defendants. It would 

be both prejudicial and 

Overruled. The court 

will give a limiting 

instruction.

Case 4:15-cv-01202-DMR Document 227 Filed 08/08/16 Page 3 of 14
JOINT EXHIBIT LIST AND OBJECTIONS

CASE NO. 15-CV-01202 DMR

4 \\candoak.cand.circ9.dcn\data\users\dmrall\_cv\2015\2015_01202_

lawman_v_city_and_county_of_san_francisco\15-cv-01202-dmrdraft_order_with_rulings_on_objs_to_exhibits_080816.docx

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

a waste of time

because the jury could 

spend time using the 

materials to evaluate 

whether Mr. Lawman 

should have been 

5150’ed – something 

they are not permitted 

to do.

As to Bates 1049-

1057, Defendants 

object to these pages 

under FRE 402, 403, 

as irrelevant, 

prejudicial, confusing, 

duplicative, and a 

waste of time. These 

pages contain 

summaries of various 

diagnoses that the jury 

might be tempted to 

use to diagnose the 

plaintiff.

18

Arrest and Control Manual, 

Ch. 9, Prisoner Transportation 

[police training], Bates Nos. 

638-639

CCSF/ Gordon

Even the two pages 

Plaintiff specifies of 

this document are not 

relevant (FRE 402), 

and should be 

excluded under 403 for 

the reasons explained 

in Defendant’s MIL 

No. 3. First, training 

about transporting 

prisoners is irrelevant 

because all claims 

against Officer 

Kneuker (the 

transporting officer) 

have been dismissed. 

There is no dispute 

that Plaintiff was 

safely transported to 

CJ1. Second, the 

pages specified by the 

plaintiff relate 

specifically to 

medically assessing a 

prisoner being 

Sustained.

Case 4:15-cv-01202-DMR Document 227 Filed 08/08/16 Page 4 of 14
JOINT EXHIBIT LIST AND OBJECTIONS

CASE NO. 15-CV-01202 DMR

5 \\candoak.cand.circ9.dcn\data\users\dmrall\_cv\2015\2015_01202_

lawman_v_city_and_county_of_san_francisco\15-cv-01202-dmrdraft_order_with_rulings_on_objs_to_exhibits_080816.docx

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

transported, including 

when to summon an 

ambulance. The claim 

for failure to provide 

medical care has been 

dismissed. The 

information contained 

in these pages is not 

relevant to any other 

claim, but even if it 

could have some 

arguable relevance, it 

is overly prejudicial 

because it risks 

suggesting to the jury 

that the officers should 

have summoned an 

ambulance, or should 

have had plaintiff 

medically evaluated.

19

Commonly Asked Questions 

About the ADA and Law 

Enforcement [police training], 

Bates Nos. 434-436 

CCSF/

Minioza

Subject to Foundation

FRE 402, 403

There is a risk that the 

jurors will accord 

more weight to this 

training manual than to 

the instructions the 

Court provides 

regardinig the law, 

with respect to what 

the ADA requires. 

Overruled, subject to 

proper foundation.

20 WITHDRAWN

21

Diagram of County Jail 1 

[location of sobering cell 

where Plaintiff was held]

Latko

Subject to foundation Ruling deferred, 

subject to proper 

foundation.

22 S.F. Department of Public 

Health Policy: Sobering Cell Latko

Case 4:15-cv-01202-DMR Document 227 Filed 08/08/16 Page 5 of 14
JOINT EXHIBIT LIST AND OBJECTIONS

CASE NO. 15-CV-01202 DMR

6 \\candoak.cand.circ9.dcn\data\users\dmrall\_cv\2015\2015_01202_

lawman_v_city_and_county_of_san_francisco\15-cv-01202-dmrdraft_order_with_rulings_on_objs_to_exhibits_080816.docx

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

23

SFPD Roll Call Training 

Lesson: Psych. Eval. of 

Adults-Part 1 [police training]

CCSF/ Gordon

Foundation, 402 and 

403

This training applies to 

5150; it specifically 

relates to 

psychologically 

distressed adults who 

have not committed a 

crime. 

Even if the Court 

permits some 

questioning regarding 

training as it relates to 

5150, this training is 

duplicative, irrelevant, 

confusing, and 

prejudicial to 

defendants. It would 

be both prejudicial and

a waste of time 

because the jury could 

spend time using the 

materials to evaluate 

whether Mr. Lawman 

should have been 

5150’ed – something 

they are not permitted 

to do.

Sustained.

24

S.F. Sheriff’s Dep. County 

Jail #1 Operations Manual: 

Sobering Cell [training re 

observation of sobering cell 

inmates] Bates Nos. 840-843

CCSF

25

SFPD General Order 5.18: 

Prisoner Handling and 

Transportation [police 

training] Bates Nos. 236-238

CCSF

FRE 402, 403

This training about 

transporting prisoners 

is irrelevant because 

all claims against 

Officer Kneuker (the 

transporting officer) 

have been dismissed. 

There is no dispute 

that Plaintiff was 

safely transported to 

CJ1. Second, the 

pages specified by the 

plaintiff include 

information about 

Sustained.

Case 4:15-cv-01202-DMR Document 227 Filed 08/08/16 Page 6 of 14
JOINT EXHIBIT LIST AND OBJECTIONS

CASE NO. 15-CV-01202 DMR

7 \\candoak.cand.circ9.dcn\data\users\dmrall\_cv\2015\2015_01202_

lawman_v_city_and_county_of_san_francisco\15-cv-01202-dmrdraft_order_with_rulings_on_objs_to_exhibits_080816.docx

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

medically assessing a 

prisoner being 

transported, giving 

first aid, and 

transporting prisoners 

to SFGH, all which 

relates to dismissed 

claims. The pages also 

relate to preventing 

escape, and preventing 

injury to prisoners. 

The information 

contained in these 

pages is not relevant to 

any other claim, but 

even if it could have 

some arguable 

relevance, it is overly 

prejudicial because it 

risks suggesting to the 

jury that the officers 

should have 

transported him to 

SFGH, or should have 

had plaintiff medically 

evaluated.

26

SFPD General Order 6.14: 

Psychological Evaluation of 

Adults [police training] Bates 

Nos. 242-246

CCSF

FRE 402 403-

This majority of this 

General Order is not 

relevant, and would be 

confusing to the jury 

because the focus is on 

5150. See Defendant’s 

MIL No. 3. Even if 

the Court permits 

some questioning

regarding training as it 

relates to 5150, this 

General Order is 

duplicative, confusing, 

and prejudicial to 

defendants. It would 

be both prejudicial and 

a waste of time 

because the jury could 

spend time using the 

materials to evaluate 

whether Mr. Lawman 

Overruled. The court 

will give a limiting 

instruction.

Case 4:15-cv-01202-DMR Document 227 Filed 08/08/16 Page 7 of 14
JOINT EXHIBIT LIST AND OBJECTIONS

CASE NO. 15-CV-01202 DMR

8 \\candoak.cand.circ9.dcn\data\users\dmrall\_cv\2015\2015_01202_

lawman_v_city_and_county_of_san_francisco\15-cv-01202-dmrdraft_order_with_rulings_on_objs_to_exhibits_080816.docx

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

should have been 

5150’ed – something 

they are not permitted 

to do.

27

SFPD Booking & Detention 

Manual, Sec. 8: Intoxicated 

Prisoners [police training] 

CCSF

FRE 402, 403

This training pertains 

to booking at district 

stations by SFPD, not 

booking by Sheriff at 

CJ1. It risks confusing 

the jury about what 

policies applied at 

CJ1, where Plaintiff 

was booked. 

Moreover, Plaintiff has 

not shown that there is 

any relevance to his 

Monell claim.

Overruled.

28

SFPD Roll Call Training 

Lesson: ADA & Law 

Enforcement – part 1 [police 

training] 

CCSF

Foundation; FRE 402. 

This training is not 

relevant because it 

relates to how to deal 

with someone 

demonstrating 

threatening behavior 

because of a disability.

This training is also 

inadmissible under 

FRE 403 because of 

the risk that the jurors 

will accord more 

weight to this training 

manual than to the 

instructions the Court 

provides regardinig the 

law, with respect to 

what the ADA 

requires.

Sustained.

29

SFPD Disabilities Awareness 

Guide: Psychiatric 

Disabilities (excerpts) [police 

training] Bates Nos. 262-263, 

265, 266, 288-290

CCSF

Foundation, FRE 402, 

403 

This Disabilities 

Awareness Guide is 

not relevant, because 

the excerpts the 

Plaintiff has chosen 

relate to 5150. See 

Defendant’s MIL No. 

Overruled. The court 

will give a limiting 

instruction.

Case 4:15-cv-01202-DMR Document 227 Filed 08/08/16 Page 8 of 14
JOINT EXHIBIT LIST AND OBJECTIONS

CASE NO. 15-CV-01202 DMR

9 \\candoak.cand.circ9.dcn\data\users\dmrall\_cv\2015\2015_01202_

lawman_v_city_and_county_of_san_francisco\15-cv-01202-dmrdraft_order_with_rulings_on_objs_to_exhibits_080816.docx

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. Even if the Court 

permits some 

questioning regarding 

training as it relates to 

5150, the portions 

Plaintif fhas chosen 

from this handbook are 

duplicative, confusing, 

and prejudicial to 

defendants. It would 

be both prejudicial and 

a waste of time 

because the jury could 

spend time using the 

materials to evaluate 

whether Mr. Lawman 

should have been 

5150’ed – something 

they are not permitted 

to do.

Moreover, Sergeant 

Kruger testified that 

this handbook is 

merely information, 

officers are not 

required to be familiar 

with its contents, and it 

is not used as a part of 

training. (Kruger 

Deposition, 85:8-19.)

30

OCC Policy Recommendation 

06.19.2003 [CCSF’s notice of 

constitutional deprivations 

through 647(f) arrests]

CCSF

Foundation Ruling deferred, 

subject to proper 

foundation.

31

American Academy of 

Psychiatry and the Law 

Ethical Guidelines 

[impropriety of rendering 

psychiatric opinions without a 

personal examination]

Keram

Objection, FRE 802, 

hearsay

Ruling deferred, 

pending testimony.

DEFENDANT’S EXHIBIT LIST

A Plaintiff’s Public Intoxication 

Report, dated December 31, 

2011 (BATES NO. CCSF 11)

Sergeant 

Gordon

No objection; Plaintiff 

stipulates to admit. 

B CAD Audio folder 2917 12-

31-11, consisting of 4 WAV 

Sergeant 

Gordon, 

No Objection; Plaintiff 

stipulates to admit. 

Case 4:15-cv-01202-DMR Document 227 Filed 08/08/16 Page 9 of 14
JOINT EXHIBIT LIST AND OBJECTIONS

CASE NO. 15-CV-01202 DMR

10 \\candoak.cand.circ9.dcn\data\users\dmrall\_cv\2015\2015_01202_

lawman_v_city_and_county_of_san_francisco\15-cv-01202-dmrdraft_order_with_rulings_on_objs_to_exhibits_080816.docx

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

files

1) 2117-2118 DP01.wav

2) 2118-2119 DP12.wav

3) 2129-2138 DP16.wav

4) 2154-2155 DP12

(BATES NO. CCSF 6)

Officer 

Minioza, DEM 

custodian of 

records

C SFPD CAD Report 

S113652917 (CCSF 34)

Custodian of 

Records, DEM

No Objection; Plaintiff 

stipulates to admit.

D Plaintiff’s Field Arrest Card, 

dated December 31, 2011 

(BATES NO. CCSF 7-8)

Custodian of 

Records, SFSD

No Objection; Plaintiff 

stipulates to admit. 

E Plaintiff’s Booking Card, 

dated December 31, 2011 

(BATES NO. CCSF 9-10)

Custodian of 

Records, SFSD

No Objection; Plaintiff 

stipulates to admit.

F Plaintiff’s Sobering Cell 

Observation Record, dated 

December 31, 2011 (BATES 

NO. CCSF 12)

Deputy 

Rappicavoli, 

Nurse Lapitan,

Custodian of 

Records, SFSD

No Objection; Plaintiff 

stipulates to admit. 

G Plaintiff’s Jail Medical 

Services records, dated 

December 31, 2011

(BATES NO. CCSF 35-41)

Nurse Latko No Objection to Bates 

No. CCSF 41; Plaintiff 

stipulates to admit.

H Sobering Cell Housing 

History, dated December 31, 

2011 (BATES NO. CCSF 42)

Custodian of 

Records, SFSD

No Objection; Plaintiff 

stipulates to admit.

Q DPH Jail Health Services 

Policy No. 303, Sobering 

Cell, rev July 2010 (BATES 

NO. CCSF 459-460)

Matt Friedman, 

Nurse Zeff, 

Nurse Lapitan,

Custodian of 

Records, DPH

No Objection; Plaintiff 

stipulates to admit.

R POST Learning Domain 6, 

Property Crimes, version 5, 

2008, Chapter 3: “Identifying 

and Classifying Crimes 

Related to Trespassing|” 

Pages 3-1 to 3-12

Lt. Jack Hart, 

Mr. Jeffrey 

Martin

Objection. FRCP 

37(c)(1): this 

document was not 

identified in 

Defendants’ Rule 26 

disclosure and was not 

produced in discovery. 

Relevance: only a few 

portions of this 

document potentially 

relate to issues 

involved in this case.

Sustained.

S POST Learning Domain 37, 

Persons with Disabilities, 

version 4, Chapter 1 1-1 to 1-

10 (BATES NO. CCSF 939-

Lt. Jack Hart, 

Mr. Jeffrey 

Martin

No Objection; Plaintiff 

stipulates to admit.

Case 4:15-cv-01202-DMR Document 227 Filed 08/08/16 Page 10 of 14
JOINT EXHIBIT LIST AND OBJECTIONS

CASE NO. 15-CV-01202 DMR

11 \\candoak.cand.circ9.dcn\data\users\dmrall\_cv\2015\2015_01202_

lawman_v_city_and_county_of_san_francisco\15-cv-01202-dmrdraft_order_with_rulings_on_objs_to_exhibits_080816.docx

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

948)

T POST Learning Domain 

8.01.E05, Public Intoxication

(BATES NO. CCSF 1058-

1060)

Lt. Jack Hart, 

Mr. Jeffrey 

Martin

Objection; relevance, 

403. The document 

includes drug 

intoxication and 

obstruction of public 

way as bases for 

647(f) arrest; however, 

the Court has 

precluded reference to 

these elements and 

inclusion of this entire 

document would be 

misleading and 

confusing to the jury, 

and therefore unduly 

prejudicial to Plaintiff. 

Overruled. The court 

will give a limiting 

instruction.

U SFPD Statistics 2005-2014, 

Misdemeanor Arrests

(BATES NO. CCSF 1784)

Jeanne 

Chisholm 

Foundation; hearsay; 

relevance; requires 

expert testimony. 

Jeanne Chisholm was 

not designated as an 

expert witness and 

Defendants did not 

designate any expert in 

statistical analysis. Ms. 

Chisholm may not 

testify “as to the 

statistical significance” 

of arrest data, even 

assuming such data is 

admissible. Shea v. 

Kerry, 961 F. Supp. 2d 

17, 50 (D. D.C. 2013). 

Plaintiff requests a 

hearing under FRE 

104 prior to 

introduction of this 

evidence at trial

Overruled, subject to 

proper foundation.

V San Francisco Area Map

(BATES NO. CCSF 1785)

Sgt. Gordon, 

Officer

Minioza

Relevance. Ruling deferred, 

pending testimony.

Y

Y

Plaintiff’s Verified Responses 

to CCSF’s Special 

Interrogatories, Set 1, served 

December 12, 2014

N/A No Objection. Plaintiff 

stipulates to admit. 

B San Francisco Public Jeffrey Martin Lack of foundation Overruled, subject to 

Case 4:15-cv-01202-DMR Document 227 Filed 08/08/16 Page 11 of 14
JOINT EXHIBIT LIST AND OBJECTIONS

CASE NO. 15-CV-01202 DMR

12 \\candoak.cand.circ9.dcn\data\users\dmrall\_cv\2015\2015_01202_

lawman_v_city_and_county_of_san_francisco\15-cv-01202-dmrdraft_order_with_rulings_on_objs_to_exhibits_080816.docx

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

B

B

Intoxication Arrests 

Compared to Other Cities 

(Exhibit C to the Deposition 

of Jeffrey Martin)

and/or authentication; 

relevance; FRE 403; 

FRCP 37 (this 

document was never 

identified or produced 

as part of Defendants’ 

Rule 26 disclosures; 

instead, it was handed 

to Plaintiff’s counsel 

for the first time at Mr. 

Martin’s deposition).

proper foundation.

C

C

C

Treatment records of Harry 

Motro, Psy.D (Exhibit 41 to 

the Deposition of Harry 

Motro, Psy.D)

Dr. Motro Relevance; hearsay;

foundation; FRE 403.

Sustained.

M

M

M

SFSD Sobering Cell Policy, 

revised March 17, 2011 

(CCSF 840-843)

Chief Deputy 

Matthew 

Freeman, 

Custodian of 

Records, SFSD

No Objection. Plaintiff 

stipulates to admit. 

N

N

N

Photo 1 of Four Seasons 

lobby

John Flores, 

Four Seasons 

security; John 

Rodie, Four 

Seasons 

concierge; 

Dwight Moore, 

City 

Investigator 

Objection. The Court 

has indicated that the 

sign outside the lounge 

may not be part of the 

exhibit.

Overruled, but 

Defense must crop or 

blur “private” sign.

O

O

O

Photo 2 of Four Seasons 

lobby

John Flores, 

Four Seasons 

security; John 

Rodie, Four 

Seasons 

concierge; 

Dwight Moore, 

City 

Investigator 

No Objection; Plaintiff 

stipulates to admit.

P

P

P

Photo 3 of Four Seasons 

lobby

John Flores, 

Four Seasons 

security; John

Rodie, Four 

Seasons 

concierge; 

Dwight Moore, 

City 

Investigator 

No Objection; Plaintiff 

stipulates to admit.

Q

Q

Q

Photo 4 of Four Seasons 

lobby

John Flores, 

Four Seasons 

security; John 

No Objection; Plaintiff 

stipulates to admit.

Case 4:15-cv-01202-DMR Document 227 Filed 08/08/16 Page 12 of 14
JOINT EXHIBIT LIST AND OBJECTIONS

CASE NO. 15-CV-01202 DMR

13 \\candoak.cand.circ9.dcn\data\users\dmrall\_cv\2015\2015_01202_

lawman_v_city_and_county_of_san_francisco\15-cv-01202-dmrdraft_order_with_rulings_on_objs_to_exhibits_080816.docx

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

Rodie, Four 

Seasons 

concierge; 

Dwight Moore, 

City 

Investigator 

R

R

R

Photo 5 of Four Seasons 

lobby

John Flores, 

Four Seasons 

security; John 

Rodie, Four 

Seasons 

concierge; 

Dwight Moore, 

City 

Investigator 

Objection. The Court 

has indicated that the 

sign outside the lounge 

may not be part of the 

exhibit.

Overruled, but 

Defense must crop or 

blur “private” sign.

S

S

S

Photo 6 of Four Seasons 

lobby

John Flores, 

Four Seasons 

security; John 

Rodie, Four 

Seasons 

concierge; 

Dwight Moore, 

City 

Investigator 

Objection. The Court 

has indicated that the 

sign outside the lounge 

may not be part of the 

exhibit.

Overruled, but 

Defense must crop or 

blur “private” sign.

Case 4:15-cv-01202-DMR Document 227 Filed 08/08/16 Page 13 of 14
JOINT EXHIBIT LIST AND OBJECTIONS

CASE NO. 15-CV-01202 DMR

14 \\candoak.cand.circ9.dcn\data\users\dmrall\_cv\2015\2015_01202_

lawman_v_city_and_county_of_san_francisco\15-cv-01202-dmrdraft_order_with_rulings_on_objs_to_exhibits_080816.docx

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

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 8, 2016

______________________________________

DONNA M. RYU

United States Magistrate Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Donna M. Ryu

Case 4:15-cv-01202-DMR Document 227 Filed 08/08/16 Page 14 of 14