Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00796/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00796-6/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jody Gardner Clanahan
Plaintiff
David Diaz
Defendant
McFarland Unified School District
Defendant
Ermalinda Ozuna
Defendant

Document Text:

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JODY GARDNER CLANAHAN, CASE NO. CV F 05-0796 LJO DLB

Plaintiff, ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS IN

LIMINE

vs. (Docs. 56, 57.)

MCFARLAND UNIFIED SCHOOL

DISTRICT, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

In this employment discrimination and retaliation and related action, this Court conducted a May

10, 2007 hearing on the motions in limine of defendants McFarland Unified School District (“District”),

Ermalinda Ozuna (“Ms.Ozuna”), and David Diaz (“Mr. Diaz”). Plaintiff Jody Gardner Clanahan (“Ms.

Clanahan”) appeared by counsel Phyllis E. Andelin, Law Offices of Phyllis E. Andelin. The District and

Ms. Ozuna appeared by counsel Arnold Anchordoquy, Clifford & Brown. Mr. Diaz appeared by counsel

Gregory L. Myers, Myers & Mayfield. This Court issues the following rulings on defendants’ motions

in limine. Further discussion on and grounds for the rulings are available from the transcript of the May

10, 2007 hearing.

1. The District/Ms. Ozuna’s Motion In Limine No. 1 To Exclude Evidence Of Death

Of Kathleen Heisy Or A District Administrator: This Court PERMITS Ms. Clanahan to testify about

a murder in McFarland subject to cross-examination that the murder at issue occurred in Bakersfield.

This Court EXCLUDES evidence that the murder victim was a District administrator.

Case 1:05-cv-00796-LJO -DLB Document 70 Filed 05/14/07 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

2. The District/Ms. Ozuna’s Motion In Limine Nos. 2 And 3 To Exclude Teacher

Credential Committee Conclusions And Reporting Requirements And Mr. Diaz’ Related Motion

In Limine No. 10: This Court GRANTS the motions in limine and EXCLUDES evidence regarding

Teacher Credential Committee conclusions and reporting requirements pertaining to Mr. Diaz.

3. The District/Ms. Ozuna’s Motion In Limine No. 4 To Exclude Evidence That Mr.

Diaz Followed Ms. Clanahan On May 1, 2004: This Court DENIES the motion on grounds that it

addresses factual and credibility issues which cannot be determined by an in limine motion.

4. The District/Ms. Ozuna’s Motion In Limine No. 5 And Mr. Diaz’ Motion In Limine

Nos. 6, 8 And 9 Regarding Ms. Clanahan’s State Law Claims: This Court DENIES the motions in

limine without prejudice.

5. The District/Ms. Ozuna’s Motion In Limine No. 6 And Mr. Diaz’ Motion In Limine

No. 2 To Exclude Witnesses: This Court GRANTS the motions in limine and EXCLUDES witnesses

from trial to prevent them to hear other witnesses’ testimony.

6. The District/Ms. Ozuna’s Motion In Limine No. 7 And Mr. Diaz’ Motions In Limine

Nos. 4 And 5 To Exclude Expert Testimony From Non-Disclosed Experts And Witnesses Barred

By Court Order: This Court GRANTS the motions in limine and PERMITS Ms. Clanahan to elicit

expert testimony from only properly qualified, designated and disclosed experts.

7. The District/Ms. Ozuna’s Motion In Limine No. 8 And Mr. Diaz’ Motion In Limine

No. 7 To Exclude Evidence Of Mr. Diaz’ Alleged Sexual Harassment Of Others: This Court

DENIES the motions in limine without prejudice, depending upon evidence presented at trial.

8. The District/Ms. Ozuna’s Motion In Limine No. 9 To Exclude Statements Of District

Employees Unauthorized To Speak For The District: This Court PRECLUDES evidence regarding

the District’s closed sessions and ORDERS counsel for the District and Ms. Ozuna, no later than May

11, 2007, to fax to Ms. Clanahan’s counsel legal authority that closed sessions are privileged.

9. The District/Ms. Ozuna’s Motion In Limine No. 10 And Mr. Diaz’ Motion In Limine

Nos. 11 and 12 To Exclude Alleged Events Or Acts Which Defendants Contend Were Not Subject

To Timely Administrative Exhaustion Or Title VII Requirements: This Court DENIES the motions

in limine.

Case 1:05-cv-00796-LJO -DLB Document 70 Filed 05/14/07 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

10. The District/Ms. Ozuna’s Motion In Limine No. 11 To Exclude Evidence Of

Meetings Regarding Mr. Diaz Status: This Court DENIES the motion in limine as the evidence at

issue addresses Ms. Clanahan’s retaliation claims.

11. The District/Ms. Ozuna’s Motion In Limine No. 12 To Exclude Expert Manohara’s

Statements That Ms. Clanahan Was Sexually Harassed And Retaliated Against: This Court

GRANTS the motion in limine and EXCLUDES expert Manohara’s statements that Ms. Clanahan was

sexually harassed and retaliated against. 

12. Mr. Diaz’ Motions In Limine Nos. 1 And 3 To Exclude Evidence Regarding

Settlement And Insurance: This Court GRANTS the motions in limine and EXCLUDES evidence

regarding settlement offers and insurance.

13. The District/Ms. Ozuna’s Oral Motion In Limine To Exclude Evidence Of Ms.

Ozuna’s Status With The District: This Court GRANTS the motion in limine without prejudice and

EXCLUDES evidence of Ms. Ozuna’s current paid administrative leave status with the District. Such

evidence may be admissible if defendants invite or open the door to such evidence.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 11, 2007 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

66h44d UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00796-LJO -DLB Document 70 Filed 05/14/07 Page 3 of 3