Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Goetz v. City of Springfield

June 22, 2010

LINDA GOETZ, PLAINTIFF,
v.
THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, GREG SEIPEL, JAY C. BARTLETT, TODD RENFROW, AND TIMOTHY DAVLIN, DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Richard Mills United States District Judge

ORDER

RICHARD MILLS, U.S. District Judge

Before the Court are a number of Motions in Limine. All of the Motions in Limine will be allowed.

I. UNOPPOSED MOTIONS

A. Completely Unopposed

The Defendants' First [d/e 55], Third [d/e 57], and Fourth [d/e 58] Motions in Limine are completely unopposed by the Plaintiff. Accordingly, these Motions are allowed.

Therefore, the Court bars the introduction of, or reference to:

* the discovery of nooses at the Department of Public Utilities (Department)*fn1 facilities (First Motion in Limine);

* previous lawsuits alleging misconduct (Third Motion in Limine); or

* the allegations made by Renatta Frazier against the City or its employees (Fourth Motion in Limine).

B. Unopposed With Reservations

In their Fifth Motion in Limine [d/e 59], the Defendants seek to bar reference to discriminatory or retaliatory acts in City divisions other than the Department. The Defendants state that this includes, but is not limited to, "Public Works, [the] Police Department and the Fire Department."

The Plaintiff has stated that she has no objection to the Motion "[t]o the extent the Defendants' request in that Motion is directed toward divisions or units of the City other than the Department."

It appears that the Plaintiff and the Defendants understand each other correctly. The Fifth Motion is related to units of City government other than the Department of Public Utilities, and it is unopposed by the Plaintiff. The Motion is allowed, and as a result, reference to discrimination or retaliation in City departments other than the Department of Public Utilities is barred.

II. DEFENDANTS' SECOND MOTION IN LIMINE

In their Second Motion in Limine [d/e 56], the Defendants seek to bar the testimony of Ryan Beal, Brent Stone, John Benanti, and Kevin McAvoy, because they were not listed as witnesses on the Plaintiff's initial disclosures, as ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.