Free Motion in Limine - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:03-cv-00386-AWT

Document 122

Filed 04/28/2008

Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

EUNICE SMITH VS. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION

: : : 3:03cv386(AWT) APRIL 28, 2008

MOTION IN LIMINE

The plaintiff respectfully moves in limine as follows: 1. To preclude the defendant from offering its proposed Exhibits 1, 3 and 4 because: A. Such exhibits predate 2001 and therefore are precluded pursuant to other orders issued by this court; B. Such exhibits concern the use of firearms, and the defendant is collaterally estopped from raising any firearms issue as a basis for its termination of the plaintiff, since the Connecticut Appellate Court has ruled that the sole basis offered by the defendant for terminating the plaintiff was her acceptance of Accelerated Rehabilitation and her having made a telephone call to another Correction Officer. 2. To preclude the defendant from offering its proposed Exhibit 8,

1

Case 3:03-cv-00386-AWT

Document 122

Filed 04/28/2008

Page 2 of 3

because such exhibit concerns a prior ruling by the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities and this court has ruled that such prior rulings are not admissible in this case. 3. To preclude the defendant from offering its proposed Exhibits 50, 51, 52, 53, 57 and 58 because: A. Such exhibits all concern the merits of the plaintiff's underlying criminal prosecution, which prosecution has been erased as a result of the plaintiff's successful completion of a program of Accelerated Rehabilitation; B. The defendant is collaterally estopped, by the prior ruling of the Connecticut Appellate Court in AFSCME, Council 4, Local 1565 v. Department of Correction, et al., No. AC 28320, from contending that it was the underlying facts of the plaintiff's criminal prosecution, rather than the fact of her having accepted the Accelerated Rehabilitation program, that were the basis of her termination. 4. To preclude the defendant from offering its proposed Exhibit 60, because the settlement or withdrawal of a civil suit against a third party is irrelevant.

2

Case 3:03-cv-00386-AWT

Document 122

Filed 04/28/2008

Page 3 of 3

THE PLAINTIFF

BY:

/s/ JOHN R. WILLIAMS (ct00215) 51 Elm Street New Haven, CT 06510 203.562.9931 Fax: 203.776.9494 [email protected] Her Attorney

CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE On the date above stated, a copy of the foregoing was filed electronically and served by mail on anyone unable to accept electronic filing. Notice of this filing will be sent by e-mail to all parties by operation of the Court's electronic filing system or by mail to anyone unable to accept electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. Parties may access this filing through the Court's CM/ECF System.

/s/ JOHN R. WILLIAMS

3