Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06556/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06556-29/pdf.json

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

---

James D. Weakley, Esq. Bar No. 082853 

Erica M. Camarena, Esq. Bar No. 227981 

THE LAW FIRM OF 

WEAKLEY, RATLIFF, 

ARENDT & McGUIRE, LLP 

I630 East Shaw Avenue, Suite 176 

Fresno, California 93710 

CLERIC, U,B, DISTRICT COURT 

EASTCRN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

Telephone: (559) 221-5256 

Facsimile: (559) 221-5262 

Attorneys for Defendant, CITY OF FRESNO 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

HOLLY LOUEN, 

Plaintiff 

VS. 

FRESNO POLICE OFFICER BRIAN 

TWEDT; THE CITY OF FRESNO, 

CALIFORNIA, 

Defendants. 

CASE NO. CIV-F-04-6556 OWW SIdS 

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT CITY 

OF FRESNO'S MOTIONS IN LIMINE 

Trial Date: September 5,2007 

The Court having review the motions in limine filed by the parties, heard oral arguments 

of same on August 24,2007. The plaintiff was represented by her attorney, Kevin G. Little. 

Defendant Brian Twedt was represented by his attorney Gregory L. Myers; and defendant City 

of Fresno was represented by its attorneys, James D. Weakley and Erica M. Camarena. 

Having heard the arguments the Court hereby issues the following rulings on Defendant 

City of Fresno's motions in limine: 

1. Motion in Limine To Preclude The Use of Evidence or Witnesses Not Previously 

Disclosed to Defendants During Discovery. 

Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 1 to preclude the testimony of any witnesses who 

were not disclosed during discovery or provided as supplemental discovery in a timely fashion 

is GRANTED. 

Proposed Order on Defendant City of Fresno's 

Motions in Limine 

Case 1:04-cv-06556-OWW -SMS Document 273 Filed 09/05/07 Page 1 of 3
2. Motion in Limine To Preclude Any Evidence Regarding Personnel Records and 

Internal Affairs Files of Brian Twedt 

Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 2 to preclude evidence of Brian Twedt's personnel 

records and IA files is reserved, as plaintiff has not yet decided whether she will pursue her 

federal Monell claims against the City of Fresno. Plaintiff is ordered to specify which customs, 

policies andlor practices of the Fresno Police Department are unconstitutional by 

DATE: 7- 4 - OF. After which time, defendant may reinstate this motion in limine. 

3. Motion in Limine to Preclude Plaintiffs Experts From Rendering Opinions 

Regarding Factual Determinations, Credibility of Witnesses, Legal Conclusions 

and Past Experiences or Claims of Success. 

Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 3 is GRANTED. 

4. Motion in Limine To Preclude Opinions of Plaintiffs Experts Ronald Weber and 

Joseph Barnes in Areas in Which They Lack Expertise. 

Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 4 is GRANTED. 

5. Motion in Limine to Preclude Plaintiffs Counsel From Making Improper 

Comments To The Jury Regarding Damages Including Any Inquiry, Comment or 

Argument That Suggests That Jurors Should Base Plaintiffs Damages On An 

Amount That The Jurors Would Charge To Endure Similar Injuries. 

Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 5 is GRANTED. 

6. Motion in Limine to Preclude Evidence, Reference to Evidence, Testimony, or 

Argument Relating to Defendant CITY OF FRESNO's Liability Insurance Should 

be Precluded. 

Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 6 is GRANTED. 

7. Motion in Limine to Preclude Plaintiff From Soliciting Evidence Regarding 

Defendant Brian Twedt's Indemnification by His Employing Entity. 

Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 7 is GRANTED. 

/// 

/// 

Proposed Order on Defendant City of Fresno's 

Motions in Limine 

Case 1:04-cv-06556-OWW -SMS Document 273 Filed 09/05/07 Page 2 of 3
8. Motion in Limine to Preclude Plaintiff From Introducing Opinion Evidence From 

Non-Expert Witnesses. 

Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 8 is GRANTED. 

9. Motion in Limine to Exclude Inadmissible Character Evidence. 

Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 9, to exclude evidence of a person's character or a 

trait of his character for the purpose of proving that she acted in conformity therewith on a 

particular occasion is GRANTED. 

10. Motion in Limine to Preclude Plaintiff From Offering Evidence, Reference to 

Evidence, Testimony, or Argument Relating to Harold Seymour PhD's Testing 

Materials. 

Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 10 will be resewed until such time that plaintiff 

decides which documents, if any, she feels need to be disclosed to the jury. At which point, a 

limiting instruction controlling its use and admonition that suchinformation be used solely in 

connection with this case, will be given. 

11. Motion in Limine to Bifurcate Monell Issues. 

Defendant's Motion in Limine No. 11 will be resewed until such time that plaintiff 

identifies her issues. Assuming plaintiff pursues her claims against the City of 

Fresno, this motion in limine to bifurcate the Monell issues will be GRANTED. 

DATED: August 29,2007 

WEAKLEY, RATLIFF, ARENDT & McGUIRE, LLI 

By: Is/ Erica M. Camarena 

Erica M. Camarena 

Attorney for Defendant 

CITY OF FRESNO 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: August 3 ,2007. 

Proposed Order on Defendant City of Fresno's 

Motions in Liminc 

Honorable Oliver W. W&r 

United States District Court Judge 

Case 1:04-cv-06556-OWW -SMS Document 273 Filed 09/05/07 Page 3 of 3