Free Order - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:04-cv-00856-GWM

Document 119

Filed 10/30/2006

Page 1 of 2

In the United States Court of Federal Claims
____________________________________ ) WALTER JAYNES, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) THE UNITED STATES, ) ) Defendant. ) ____________________________________)

No. 04-856C

Filed October 30, 2006

ORDER Pursuant to the Court's Order filed September 21, 2006, the parties participated in a pretrial conference on Monday, October 30, 2006. The Court began by dealing with the parties' motions in limine and their objections to certain proposed exhibits. The Court DENIED defendant's motion in limine (Docket Entry 110), which sought to preclude plaintiffs from introducing evidence to show that two elements of an accord and satisfaction were not present, i.e., the elements of competent parties and an appropriate subject matter. The Court reserved judgment until trial on defendant's objections (Docket Entry 111) to: 1) plaintiffs' summary exhibits (PX-024, PX-025, PX-026, PX-027), pending defendant's cross-examination of Ms. Kristi Emigh, the preparer of the summary exhibits (Ms. Emigh's direct testimony will be by her amended declaration filed October 27, 2006), 2) plaintiffs' impeachment exhibits (PX-018, PX-019, PX-020, PX-021, PX-022, PX-023), which counsel for plaintiffs stated may not be introduced at trial, and 3) plaintiffs'so-called hearsay exhibits (PX-004, PX-009), which counsel for plaintiffs stated will not be introduced to prove the truth of the matter contained therein. The Court DENIED plaintiffs' motion in limine (Docket Entry 112) with respect to testimony relating to: 1) unexpressed intentions and the interpretation of ambiguous nonverbal conduct, 2) evidence relating to post-grievance events, and 3) testimony of A. Rodger Brown. The denial was without prejudice to plaintiffs' right to object to such evidence at trial on the grounds set forth in their motion in limine. The parties represented that they would waive opening statements in view of the thorough pre-trial briefing of the parties' positions with respect to the facts and applicable law.

Case 1:04-cv-00856-GWM

Document 119

Filed 10/30/2006

Page 2 of 2

Defendant, which will go first, stated that it would call the following witness in the following order: Barry Joe Aiken, Joseph L. Hamel, Lynette Niemi, Mark Winkler, Mary Jane Tallman, A. Rodger Brown, and Rodney J. Witcher. Plaintiffs stated that they would call the following witnesses in the following order: David Hurm, Walter Jaynes, Kristi Emigh, Dean Benton, and Paul Scott. The parties expressed the view that they believed the trial could be concluded in three days. IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ George W. Miller GEORGE W. MILLER Judge

-2-