Filed: Sep. 06, 2018
Latest Update: Sep. 06, 2018
Summary: ORDER JAN E. DuBOIS , J. AND NOW , this 5 th day of September, 2018, upon consideration of Defendants City of Philadelphia, Charles Ramsey, Roland Lee, and Karyn Baldini's Motion for Summary Judgment (Document No. 90, filed Oct. 13, 2017), and Plaintiff's Response to Defendants the City of Philadelphia, Charles Ramsey, Roland Lee, and Karyn Baldini's Motion in Limine (Document No. 114, filed Aug. 14, 2018), for the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum dated September 5, 2018,
Summary: ORDER JAN E. DuBOIS , J. AND NOW , this 5 th day of September, 2018, upon consideration of Defendants City of Philadelphia, Charles Ramsey, Roland Lee, and Karyn Baldini's Motion for Summary Judgment (Document No. 90, filed Oct. 13, 2017), and Plaintiff's Response to Defendants the City of Philadelphia, Charles Ramsey, Roland Lee, and Karyn Baldini's Motion in Limine (Document No. 114, filed Aug. 14, 2018), for the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum dated September 5, 2018, ..
More
ORDER
JAN E. DuBOIS, J.
AND NOW, this 5th day of September, 2018, upon consideration of Defendants City of Philadelphia, Charles Ramsey, Roland Lee, and Karyn Baldini's Motion for Summary Judgment (Document No. 90, filed Oct. 13, 2017), and Plaintiff's Response to Defendants the City of Philadelphia, Charles Ramsey, Roland Lee, and Karyn Baldini's Motion in Limine (Document No. 114, filed Aug. 14, 2018), for the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum dated September 5, 2018, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. Defendants City of Philadelphia, Charles Ramsey, Roland Lee, and Karyn Baldini's Motion in Limine is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART, as follows:
a. That part of the defendants' motion seeking to exclude plaintiff's vocational report prepared by Sonya Mocarski is GRANTED.
b. That part of defendants' motion seeking to exclude the testimony of Sonya Mocarski is DENIED, as limited by the attached Memorandum.
c. That part of defendants' motion seeking to exclude evidence relating to Plaintiff's previous lawsuit, subsequent settlement agreement, and any allegations of retaliation by the defendants is GRANTED. To the extent that plaintiff believes that such evidence is relevant to his remaining claims, he must seek reconsideration of this Order before referring to the evidence at trial in the presence of the jury.
d. That part of defendants' motion seeking to exclude evidence related to James Singleton's arrest is GRANTED. To the extent that plaintiff believes that such evidence is relevant to his remaining claims, he must seek reconsideration of this Order before referring to the evidence at trial in the presence of the jury.
e. That part of defendants' motion seeking to exclude the plaintiff's commendations or awards is GRANTED. This ruling is without prejudice to plaintiff's right to seek reconsideration of this part of the Order if defendants attack plaintiff's credibility or truthfulness at trial and plaintiff establishes that the commendations or awards are evidence of his credibility or truthfulness.
f. That part of defendants' motion seeking to exclude evidence regarding plaintiff's religious affiliation and position in his church is GRANTED.
g. A ruling on that part of defendants' motion seeking to exclude evidence of Captain McCloskey as a comparator is DEFERRED until trial.
h. That part of defendants' motion seeking to exclude evidence of Detective Rossiter as a comparator is GRANTED.
i. A ruling on that part of defendants' motion seeking to exclude evidence of Jeffrey Cujdik as a comparator is DEFERRED until trial.
j. A ruling on that part of plaintiff's response seeking to include evidence of Angel Ortiz as a comparator is DEFERRED until trial.
k. A ruling on that part of plaintiff's response seeking to introduce "new evidence" is DEFERRED until trial.
2. The rulings in this Memorandum and Order are WITHOUT PREJUDICE to the right of the parties to seek reconsideration at trial if warranted by the evidence and the law as stated in the attached Memorandum.
