Opinion ID: 2974829
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Order Denying Fitts’ Motion in Limine and TRO

Text: This Court is unable to review Fitts' claim regarding the district court's denial of his motion -7- No. 04-2232 Cameron Fitts v. Kathy Sicker, et. al. for a TRO to return his legal work and to stop alleged shower assaults against him. Although the district court issued an order denying the motion, the order does not explain the reasons for the denial. Instead, it states, “for the reasons more fully set forth on the record during the hearing, the Court makes the following rulings . . . ” See District Court Docket Entry 185 at 1 (Order on Pretrial Motions). The court denied Fitts' motion in limine requesting the handcuffs and shackles be removed from his witnesses when they appeared in court in a similar fashion. See District Court Docket Entry 235 at 1 (Order on Pretrial Motions). Without transcripts of the relevant proceedings, this Court cannot adequately address these concerns nor can we determine if any error was made. In Creasy, the court affirmed the district court's rulings since none of the appellant's issues was reviewable. 1998 WL 384584 at . Likewise, this Court affirms the district court's rulings with respect to these claims.