Opinion ID: 1194191
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Evidentiary and trial management rulings.

Text: At a pretrial conference in early November 2004, the district court announced that each side would be allowed three days to present its case. Plaintiffs filed a written objection to the time limit on due process grounds. The objection was overruled, and a six-day bench trial was held, with each side receiving equal time. At trial, the district court adhered to its prior order on time limitations, advising counsel when time was running short. The district court also ruled against the plaintiffs and in the County's favor on a number of evidentiary issues. First, the district court barred the admission of a survey of inmates regarding jail conditions conducted by plaintiffs' expert, Dr. Nadereh Pourat (Pourat Survey). Second, the district court ruled that plaintiffs could not submit deposition testimony of class members who were in prisons more than 100 miles from the courthouse, on the grounds that such witnesses were not unavailable. Third, the district court allowed the County to introduce statements by absent class members as admissions by party-opponents.