Free Response to Motion - District Court of Colorado - Colorado


File Size: 15.2 kB
Pages: 3
Date: December 1, 2005
File Format: PDF
State: Colorado
Category: District Court of Colorado
Author: unknown
Word Count: 539 Words, 3,222 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cod/25796/60.pdf

Download Response to Motion - District Court of Colorado ( 15.2 kB)


Preview Response to Motion - District Court of Colorado
Case 1:04-cv-01126-MJW-PAC

Document 60

Filed 12/01/2005

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 04-CV-01126-MJW-PAC

BRIAN HILDENBRANDT, Plaintiff,

v. THE CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS, a Colorado municipal corporation, Defendant.

OBJECTION TO MOTION IN LIMINE REGARDING SITE VISIT

COMES NOW Defendant, City of Colorado Springs ("City"), by and through the Office of the City Attorney, and submits the following opposition to Plaintiff's motion requesting a site visit. 1. Defendant believes a site visit in this case would be a waste of time and would

involve needless presentation of cumulative evidence under F.R.E. 403. The Broadmoor Hotel is more than 70 miles away from the court in this matter. 2. Plaintiff asserts that the jury should be allowed to either view the scene or a

video to be able to assess characteristics of the limited access area. However, testimony can be introduced on this topic through witnesses. On the final pretrial order, Plaintiff has endorsed photographs taken by Plaintiff as well as a map of the alleged area. Defendant has endorsed maps of the site of the Broadmoor Hotel and surrounding streets. These maps were used at the depositions

Case 1:04-cv-01126-MJW-PAC

Document 60

Filed 12/01/2005

Page 2 of 3

of witnesses in this case. This would be an efficient and effective means of communicating characteristics of the limited access area to the jury. 3. In regard to Plaintiff's request for a video, such a video is not listed as an exhibit for

the Plaintiff in the final pretrial order. No video has been endorsed in disclosures by the Plaintiff and none has been produced or made available to the defense. Therefore, neither a site visit, which would require a lengthy drive in January, nor a videotape, which is not on the final pretrial order, should be allowed in this case. Dated this 1st day of December, 2005. Respectfully submitted, PATRICIA K. KELLY City Attorney/Chief Legal Officer Reg. No. 014408

s/Thomas J. Marrese Thomas J. Marrese Senior Attorney Reg. No. 15138 Colorado Springs City Attorney's Office 30 South Nevada Avenue, Ste. 501 P.O. Box 1575, Mail Code 510 Colorado Springs, Colorado 80901-1575 Telephone: (719) 385-5909 Facsimile: (719) 385-5535 E-mail: [email protected] Attorneys for Defendant City of Colorado Springs

2

Case 1:04-cv-01126-MJW-PAC

Document 60

Filed 12/01/2005

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE (CM/ECF) I hereby certify that on Decemmber 1, 2005, I electronically filed the foregoing OBJECTION TO MOTION IN LIMINE REGARDING SITE VISIT with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following e-mail addresses: [email protected], and I hereby certify that I have mailed or served the document or paper to the following non CM/ECF participants in the manner (mail, hand-delivery, etc.) indicated by the non-participants name:

s/Tiffany M. Haywood Tiffany M. Haywood Legal Assistant Colorado Springs City Attorney's Office 30 South Nevada Avenue, Ste. 501 P.O. Box 1575, Mail Code 510 Colorado Springs, Colorado 80901-1575 Telephone: (719) 385-5909 Facsimile: (719) 385-5535 [email protected]

3