Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-05672/USCOURTS-caed-1_02-cv-05672-15/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner 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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WAYNE RICHARDSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. JURCAK, E. PEARCH, RICKS,

R. MYERS, S. DAY, AND G. DOSER,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:02-cv-05672-LJO PC

ORDER FOLLOWING TELEPHONIC TRIAL

CONFIRMATION HEARING

ORDER ACCEPTING STIPULATION,

GRANTING REQUEST TO ALLOW

CUSTODIANS OF RECORD TO

AUTHENTICATE VIA DECLARATION,

ADDRESSING DEFENDANTS’

EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS, AND

ADDRESSING PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS IN

LIMINE

(Doc. 96)

Plaintiff Wayne Richardson (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This is an action for damages

proceeding on plaintiff’s complaint, filed June 6, 2002, against defendants C. Jurcak, E. Pearch,

Ricks, R. Myers, S. Day, and G. Doser (“defendants”) on plaintiff’s claim that defendants violated

plaintiff’s rights under the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution on August 9, 1999,

when they failed to protect plaintiff prior to and during the course of an attack on plaintiff by inmate

Moore. 

A telephonic trial confirmation hearing was held in this case on January 4, 2007, at 9:30 a.m.

This matter is confirmed for jury trial on January 23, 2007, at 9:00 a.m. However, pursuant to the

parties’ representation that a settlement conference might be helpful in resolving this case, a

Case 1:02-cv-05672-NEW Document 97 Filed 01/04/07 Page 1 of 3
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

telephonic settlement conference was set for January 8, 2007, at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom 7 before the

Honorable Sandra M. Snyder by separate order. 

The Pretrial Order in this case was filed on December 22, 2006. Neither plaintiff nor

defendants filed written objections or raised objections during the hearing.

As discussed during the hearing, to prevent requiring MTA Johnson to testify and to promote

the speedy resolution of the trial, defendants offered to stipulate that “Plaintiff, Wayne Richardson,

received immediate medical attention from medical staff following the stabbing. Medical Technical

Assistants are Licensed Vocational Nurses. At least two Medical Technical Assistants responded

to the Prison Industry Building and offered Plaintiff first aid and escorted him to the infirmary on

a stretcher.” Plaintiff did not object to the stipulation, and it is accepted.

Defendants requested that the custodians of record be permitted to authenticate documents

via their declarations rather than by appearance at trial, and plaintiff had no objection. During the

hearing, defendants withdrew their objections to plaintiff’s proposed Exhibits C and H, which are

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation documents, on the basis of foundation.

Accordingly, no disputes over the authenticity of CDCR documents exist and defendants’ request

is granted. The custodians of record may authenticate documents by declaration.

As discussed during the hearing, defendants’ objection to plaintiff’s Exhibits B, D, and F,

which are discovery documents, is resolved in that it is unnecessary for plaintiff to show the

documents to the jury. Plaintiff may read from them and show them to witnesses as is necessary and

permissible. Defendants’ objection to plaintiff’s Exhibit C, a CDC-128 form, coming into evidence

on the ground that it contains hearsay is sustained. Defendants’ objections to plaintiff’s Exhibit G,

a portion of plaintiff’s tort claim, as irrelevant, incomplete, lacking foundation, cumulative, and

containing hearsay are sustained. Defendants’ objection to plaintiff’s Exhibit H, a CDC-837

Crime/Incident Report, coming into evidence on the ground that it contains hearsay is sustained.

Finally, during the hearing plaintiff raised motions in limine regarding two marijuana joints

found during a search of his cell on August 9, 1999, his criminal conviction (commitment offense),

and two batteries involving other inmates in 1997. Defendants withdrew their proffer of evidence

relating to the marijuana joints, and plaintiff’s motion as to that issue is moot. Defendants are

Case 1:02-cv-05672-NEW Document 97 Filed 01/04/07 Page 2 of 3
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

entitled to offer evidence of plaintiff’s and plaintiff’s inmate witnesses’ felony convictions for

impeachment purposes, and plaintiff’s motion as to that issue is denied. Regarding the two incidents

of battery, defendants have until 4:00 p.m. on January 8, 2007, within which to provide plaintiff and

the court with copies of their documentary evidence establishing a link between those events and the

incident on August 9, 1999. If defendants are unable to cite any evidence establishing a link between

the events, in support of their theories concerning motivation and retaliation, plaintiff’ s motion to

exclude evidence of these battery incidents shall be granted. 

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Defendants’ proposed stipulation concerning MTA Johnson is accepted;

2. Defendants’ request that the custodians of record be permitted to authenticate via

declaration is granted;

3. Defendants’ objections to plaintiff’s Exhibits C, G, and H are sustained;

4. Plaintiff’s motion in limine relating to the marijuana joints is denied as moot;

5. Plaintiff’s motion in limine relating to his criminal conviction is denied; and

6. Defendants have until 4:00 p.m. on January 8, 2007, within which to submit

documentary evidence establishing a link between the battery incidents in 1997 and

the incident at issue in this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 4, 2007 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:02-cv-05672-NEW Document 97 Filed 01/04/07 Page 3 of 3