Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

MARTINEZ v. INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, 2:14-cv-56-JAD-CWH. (2014)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20140813e91 Visitors: 15
Filed: Aug. 13, 2014
Latest Update: Aug. 13, 2014
Summary: Order Denying Motion in Limine Doc. 48 JENNIFER A. DORSEY, District Judge. Pro se plaintiff Mary Martinez has filed a motion in limine (Doc. 48), asking the court to enter an "order to prevent the defendants from testifying, eliciting testimony, or by any other means convey specific irrelevant information to the jury." This case is seven months old and motions to dismiss and for leave to amend remain pending. Docs. 4, 40. At this nascent stage of the litigation, an order limiting trial argumen
More

Order Denying Motion in Limine Doc. 48

JENNIFER A. DORSEY, District Judge.

Pro se plaintiff Mary Martinez has filed a motion in limine (Doc. 48), asking the court to enter an "order to prevent the defendants from testifying, eliciting testimony, or by any other means convey specific irrelevant information to the jury." This case is seven months old and motions to dismiss and for leave to amend remain pending. Docs. 4, 40. At this nascent stage of the litigation, an order limiting trial arguments would be premature. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion in limine [Doc. 48] is DENIED without prejudice to its refiling closer to trial. Plaintiff is cautioned that, before she files any future motion in limine, she shall first meet and confer with opposing counsel in a good-faith attempt to reach an agreement on the limiting issue she seeks to raise. Any future motion in limine in this case must be accompanied by a declaration detailing the good faith efforts undertaken to resolve the issue before filing the motion.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer