Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01617/USCOURTS-caed-1_10-cv-01617-30/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

27

28

James J. Arendt, Esq. Bar No. 142937

Roy C. Santos, Esq. Bar No. 259718

WEAKLEY & ARENDT, LLP

1630 East Shaw Avenue, Suite 176

Fresno, California 93710

Telephone: (559) 221-5256

Facsimile: (559) 221-5262

Attorneys for Defendants, COUNTY OF FRESNO and DAVID ALANIS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES LORAN QUINN,

Plaintiff,

vs.

FRESNO COUNTY SHERIFF, FRESNO

COUNTY PROBATION DEPARTMENT,

OFFICER DAVID ALANIS, OFFICER

LEONARD RICHERT, FRESNO COUNTY

DISTRICT ATTORNEY, FRESNO

COUNTY JAIL, ET AL. and DOES 1 to 100

INCLUSIVE,

Defendants.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO.: 1:10-CV-01617-LJO-BAM

STIPULATION TO THE ENFORCEMENT

OF THE COURT’S PREVIOUS ORDER

GRANTING CERTAIN OF THE PARTIES

PREVIOUSLY FILED MOTIONS IN LIMINE

AND ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED byand between the parties, through their respective counsel, and

ordered by this Court, that the Court’s Orders, Document Nos. 120 & 123, granting certain of the parties

motions in limine be applicable to the present trial and thus preventing the needless refiling of these

select motions in limine. The parties stipulate to the following previously filed motions in limine which

were granted by the Court:

(1) Plaintiff’s previously filed motion in limine number 1 (Doc. No. 110);

(2) Defendants’ previouslyfiled motions in limine numbers 2-3, 5-8, 14 and 16-17 (Doc. No.

111);

The parties further stipulate that the Court’s Orders granting each of these previously filed

____________________________

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order

Case 1:10-cv-01617-LJO-BAM Document 213 Filed 09/11/13 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

motions in limine have the same control as they did in the previous trial; unless, the Court so chooses

to alter it’s Orders. (Doc. Nos. 110, 111, 120 & 123)

 IT IS SO STIPULATED.

DATED: September 10, 2013 WEAKLEY & ARENDT, LLP

By: /s/ Roy C. Santos 

James J. Arendt

Roy C. Santos

Attorneys for Defendants

DATED: September 10, 2013 By: /s/ David M. Hollingsworth 

David M. Hollingsworth

Attorney for Plaintiff

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 11, 2013 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 66h44d

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

____________________________

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order 2

Case 1:10-cv-01617-LJO-BAM Document 213 Filed 09/11/13 Page 2 of 2