THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

JACK BEAM and RENEE BEAM,

Plaintiffs,

v.

MATTHEW S. PETERSEN, FEDERAL

ELECTION COMMISSION CHAIRMAN,

Defendant.

 Civil No. 07cv1227

 Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer 

 Magistrate Judge Cole 

 [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING

 DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN LIMINE

This matter having come before the Court upon Defendant Federal Election

Commission’s (“FEC”) motion in limine pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 104(a); the Court

having reviewed the motion and related papers; due and proper notice of the Motion having been

provided; and after due deliberation and sufficient cause appearing therefore, the Court finds that

the motion should be GRANTED.

WHEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the following evidence shall be excluded

from trial in this case:

1. Evidence, including testimony, relevant only to claims the Court has already

dismissed from this case, including the letter from Jack Beam to Michael E.

Toner, dated October 6, 2006 and the letter from Renee E. Beam to Michael E.

Toner, dated October 6, 2006; 

2. Evidence, including testimony, relevant only to the Department of Justice’s

(“DOJ”) criminal investigation, indictment, or trial of Geoffrey Fieger and

Vernon Johnson, including the grand jury indictment and subsequent acquittal of

Fieger and Johnson; 

Case 1:07-cv-01227 Document 195 Filed 07/27/10 Page 1 of 2
3. Evidence, including testimony, that would breach the secrecy of the FiegerJohnson grand jury investigation; 

4. Testimony by M. Kendall Day relating only to plaintiffs’ already dismissed

claims or to DOJ’s conduct of the Fieger-Johnson criminal investigation and

proceedings, including testimony that would breach the secrecy of the FiegerJohnson grand jury investigation–specifically, Mr. Day’s testimony will be

limited to:

(a) Mr. Day’s knowledge of plaintiffs’ financial records;

(b) Mr. Day’s communications with FEC employees about plaintiffs;

(c) Mr. Day’s knowledge of the categories of information shared with FEC

employees; and

(d) Mr. Day’s knowledge of information about plaintiffs’ financial records

shared with FEC employees.

5. Evidence, including testimony, of claimed actual damages beyond any pecuniary

harm caused by the alleged violation by the FEC of the Right to Financial Privacy

Act, including any evidence that plaintiffs suffered harm as a result of DOJ’s

Fieger-Johnson criminal investigation or the FEC’s civil investigation into alleged

campaign finance violations by associates of Fieger, Fieger, Kenney & Johnson,

P.C., and any evidence of harm resulting from emotional distress, reputational

harm, or embarrassment; and

6. Evidence, including testimony, protected by the attorney work product doctrine or

the law enforcement investigatory privilege, including the documents listed on the

FEC’s privilege log marked with Bates numbers 45-51, 52-57, 58-59, 60-63, 64-

65, 162-163, 164-169, 177, 180-181, 193, 194, 196-97, 206-209, 221-224, 239-

244, 311, and 594-611.

ENTERED: July 27, 2010

 _________________________________

HON. REBECCA R. PALLMEYER 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-01227 Document 195 Filed 07/27/10 Page 2 of 2