Free Objections - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 1 of 24

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

04-cv-01067-REB-CBS WILLIAM R. CADORNA, Plaintiff, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, COLORADO, a Municipal Corporation, Defendant.

PLAINTIFF' O J C I N T D F N A TSE HBT S B E TO S O E E D N ' X IIS

Plaintiff William R. Cadorna ("lni ) hereby states his objections to the Pa t " if f following Exhibits listed by Defendant in the Final Pretrial Order entered by Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer on April 17, 2006: 1. 01/02/03, Departmental Order of Disciplinary Action: Plaintiff objects to

this exhibit because: ()t o ti i omai ta in trl a t v e c " n e a i na sn r t n h t o " e n e i n e u d r c n f o s ev d F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " n e e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t d ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains hearsay that does not meet

1

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 2 of 24

the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 2. objection. 3. 12/13/02, Contemplation of Disciplinary Action: Plaintiff objects to this 12/21/02 Transmittal Letter of Contemplation of Disciplinary Action: No

e h i e a s :a i o ti i omai ta in trl a t v e c " n e x it c u e ()t na sn r t n h t o " e n e i n e u d r bb c n f o s ev d F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " n e e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t d ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 4. 5. 12/13/02, Notice of Investigatory Leave, effective 12/28/02: No objection. 12/07/02, Memorandum to Assistant Chief Hart from Bill Cadorna re:

" o k o k rm S fw y: Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because it contains hearsay C ob o f o ae a " that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 6. 12/07/02, Memorandum to Asst. Chief Hart from Lt. Frank J. Hoffman re:

"iC d ra: Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because it contains hearsay that does not Bl a on " l

2

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 3 of 24

meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 7. 12/07/02, Memorandum to Assistant Chief Hart from Russ Dobson,

Engineer TR-27 r:" o k o k rm S fw y: Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because e C ob o f o ae a " it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 8. 12/07/02, Memorandum to Assistant Chief Hart from Gil Lettig, 97002, re:

" o k o k rm S fw y: Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because it contains hearsay C ob o f o ae a " that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 9. 12/08/02, Memorandum to K. S. Caldwell, Division Chief, Operations from

Joe Hart, Assistant Chief, District Five re: "i f he Bl a on , 270 "Plaintiff Fr i tr iC d ra 1 //2: eg l objects to this exhibit because: (a) it contains information that n trl a t v e c " i o " e n ei ne s ev d u d r e ..v . 0 a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " n e n e F dRE i 4 1 n 0 ;b to g t d ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807.

3

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 4 of 24

10.

1 /80 , e i P u Mc e 'h n w i ns tme toAsst. Chief Joe 20 /2 K v a l K e a d rt t e n t n s t e a

Hart re: cookbook incident: No objection. 11. 12/10/02, Memorandum from Robert Brady to Steve Garrod and James

Sestrich re: telephone call with Plaintiff: Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because: (a) it c na snomai ta in trl a t v e c " n e F d o ti i r t n h t o " e n e i n e u d r e .R.Evid. 401 and 402; (b) n f o s ev d to g i y o ti " l a t v e c " n e Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative h u ht ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 12. In the Matter of: William R. Cadorna, Cases No. 03-CSC-01 and 03-CSC-

0 ,Fn i s C n l i s n D c i "Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because: (a) it 2 "i n , o c s n a d e io : dg uo sn c na snomai ta in trl a t v e c " n e Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402; (b) o ti i r t n h t o " e n e i n e u d r n f o s ev d to g i y o ti " l a t v e c " n e Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative h u ht ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the

4

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 5 of 24

requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 13. 11/09/02, Memorandum from Lt. David Feilmeier, through the Chain of

C mma dt F Wia C d rar:" e o o n o F l m a on e R c mme ded discipline for Rule Violation l i n rp r: Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because: (a) it contains information that is not e ot " " l a t v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t r e n e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t ev d d ma c na r e n n ev ei ne u d r v e c " n e Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially d outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 14. 11/15/02, Memorandum from Lt. Feilmeier, through Chief Finken to Lt.

R bBa y H B r:" c e t o c ri Wia C d rao 1 /60 "Plaintiff o rd , R ,e I i n c n en g l m a on n 10 /2: nd n l i objects to this exhibit because: (a) it contains information that in trl a t v e c " s o " e n ei ne ev d u d r e ..v . 0 a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " n e n e F dRE i 4 1 n 0 ;b to g t d ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that

5

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 6 of 24

does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 15. 11/25/02, Memorandum from Assistant Chief Hart, through Division Chief

Caldwell toItra Afi / R C i G r dr:"FBl a on "s s e s no nen l f r H B h f ar e F iC d ra (u p n i f as e o l o di r le s )Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because: (a) it contains information that r e' i n e: v sc in trl a t v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti s o " e n e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t ev d d ma c na n " l a t v e c " n e Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially r e n ei ne u d r ev d outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 16. 11/26/02, Memorandum from Steve J. Garrod (Assistant Chief, Human

Resources Bureau), through Jim Sestrich (Div. Chief of Administration) to Kelly Caldwell (Div. Chief o O eai s r:"tts f FWia C d ra D in L e s "Plaintiff f p rt n )e Sau o F o l m a on ' r i i n e: l i s vg c o j t t tie h i e a s :a i o ti i omai ta in trl a t v e c " b c o h x it c u e ()t na sn r t n h t o " e n e i n e es s bb c n f o s ev d u d r e ..v . 0 a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " n e n e F dRE i 4 1 n 0 ;b to g t d ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is

6

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 7 of 24

inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 17. 12/31/02, Tape and transcript of pre-disciplinary meeting: Plaintiff objects

to this exhibit because it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 18. 01/02/03, Departmental Order of Disciplinary Action (same as No. 1):

Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because: ()t o ti i omai ta in trl a t a i na sn r t n h t o " e n c n f o s ev e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1 n 0 ;b to g t d d ma c na r e n e i n e n ev d under Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 19. 06/16/02, Memorandum from Assistant Chief Hart to Lt. Frank Hoffman,

Lt. Jerome Fleming and Firefighter Bill Cadorna re: " a on C mp i , o fmi C d ra o ln C ni n at r g Me " No objection. mo: 20. 0 /50 , mof m C l e t G r dr:Frf 71 /2 Me r o a w lo ar e "i ighter William Cadorna d l o e

R l Vo t n: No objection. u iai " e lo

7

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 8 of 24

21.

0 /60 , mof m C l e t Pa t r:" i ii r I u s 62 /2 Me r o a w lo lni e Ds pn y s e ­ d l if f c la s

Frf he Wia C d ra: No objection. i i tr l m a on " eg l i 22. 06/16/02, DFD Rule Violation Report (minor): Plaintiff objects to this

exhibit because ()t o ti i omai ta in trl a t v e c " n e :a i na sn r t n h t o " e n e i n e u d r c n f o s ev d F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " n e e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t d ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 23. 24. 06/16/00 (sic), Letter from Plaintiff to Hart: No objection. 0 /60 , mof m Fe n t H rr:" o ln f m Wia 61 /2 Me r o l g o ate C mp i r mi a to lm l i

C d ra: No objection. a on " 25. No objection. 26. 27. 12/10/02, Letter to Plaintiff re: pre-disciplinary meeting: No objection. 1 /30 , mof m C l e t S s i r:"etr f o c r 00 /2 Me r o a w lo e tc e L t o C n en d l rh e 0 /60 , mof m Fe n t H rr:Pa t '" r A s n n" 61 /2 Me r o l g o ate lnis Wok si me t mi if f g :

R g ri FF Bl a on " / e tc 'h n w i nn t: No objection. e ad g .. iC d ra w S s i s a d rt oe n l rh t e 28. 0 /30 , mof m H rt C l e r:"FBl a on "Plaintiff 92 /2 Me r o ato a w l e F iC d ra: d l l

objects to this exhibit because ()t o ti i omai ta in trl a t v e c " :a i na sn r t n h t o " e n e i n e c n f o s ev d

8

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 9 of 24

u d r e ..v . 0 a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " n e n e F dRE i 4 1 n 0 ;b to g t d ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 29. 09/23/02, Memo from Capt. Burmeister to Hart r:"FBl a on " e F iC d ra: l

Pa t o j t t tie h i e a s :a i o ti i omai ta in trl a t lni b c o h x it c u e ()t na sn r t n h t o " e n if es f s bb c n f o s ev e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1 n 0 ;b to g t d d ma c na r e n e i n e n ev d under Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 30. 0 /30 , mof m L. r P mp n t H rr:"FBl a on " 92 /2 Me r o tMak o o i o ate F iC d ra: o l

Pa t o j t t tie h i e a s :a i o ti i omai ta in trl a t lni b c o h x it c u e ()t na sn r t n h t o " e n if es f s bb c n f o s ev e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1 n 0 ;b to g t d d ma c na r e n e i n e n ev d under Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the

9

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 10 of 24

danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 31. 09/30/02, DFD Rule Violation Report (reprimand) w/ Attachment A:

Pa t o j t t tie h i e a s :a i o ti i omai ta in trl a t lni b c o h x it c u e ()t na sn r t n h t o " e n if es f s bb c n f o s ev e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1 n 0 ;b to g t d d ma c na r e n e i n e n ev d under Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 32. 1 /80 , r tu f m C l a oB ra o Iv sg t nr:Pa t ' 02 /2 Pi o tr n o o rd ue u fn e t ai e lnis o i o if f

di r le s : Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because: (a) it contains information that is r e' i n e v sc n trl a t v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti o " e n e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t ev d d ma c na n " l a t v e c " n e Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially r e n ei ne u d r ev d outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of

10

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 11 of 24

cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 33. 11/06/02, Printout from C l a oB ra o Iv sg t nr:Pa t ' o rd ue u fn e t ai e lnis o i o if f

di r le s : Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because: (a) it contains information that is r e' i n e v sc n trl a t v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti o " e n e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t ev d d ma c na n " l a t v e c " n e Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially r e n ei ne u d r ev d outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 34. 1 /9 D D"rf a dP bc aey §7 : Plaintiff objects to this exhibit 09 , F Taf n u l S ft i c i " 0

b c u e ()t o ti i omai ta in trl a t v e c " n e F dRE i e a s :a i na sn r t n h t o " e n e i n e u d r e ..v . c n f o s ev d d 401 and 402; (b) though it ma c na " l a t v e c " n e Fed.R.Evid. 401 and y o ti r e n e i n e u d r n ev d 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains hearsay that does not meet the

11

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 12 of 24

requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 35. 0 /5 D D"rf a dP bc aey § 0 Plaintiff objects to this exhibit 29 , F Taf n u l S ft 7 : i c i "

b c u e ()t o ti i omai ta in trl a t v e c " n e F dRE i e a s :a i na sn r t n h t o " e n e i n e u d r e ..v . c n f o s ev d d 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " n e Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 0 n 0 ;b to g t ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 36. "o L. . rd ,rm B C d ra R bI s r " T : tR Ba y f o . a on , o ' or ­handwritten note: m y

Pa t o j t t tie h i e a s :a i o ti i omai ta in trl a t lni b c o h x it c u e ()t na sn r t n h t o " e n if es f s bb c n f o s ev e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1 n 0 ;b to g t d d ma c na r e n e i n e n ev d under Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807.

12

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 13 of 24

37.

Denver Fire Department Directive Number 106.01: Plaintiff objects to this

e h i e a s :a i o ti i omai ta in trl a t v e c " n e x it c u e ()t na sn r t n h t o " e n e i n e u d r bb c n f o s ev d F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " n e e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t d ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 38. 39. Pa t 'P to fr g a dS ri R te n: No objection. lnis ei n o A e n ev e ei me t if f t i c r FBPA Local Defined Benefit Plan Notification of New Retiree for Plaintiff:

Pa t o j t t tie h i e a s :a i o ti i omai ta in trl a t lni b c o h x it c u e ()t na sn r t n h t o " e n if es f s bb c n f o s ev e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1 n 0 ;b to g t d d ma c na r e n e i n e n ev d under Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 40. FBPA Form W-4P Monthly Pension Distribution for Plaintiff: Plaintiff

o j t t tie h i e a s :a i o ti i omai ta in trl a t v e c " b c o h x it c u e ()t na sn r t n h t o " e n e i n e es s bb c n f o s ev d u d r e ..v . 0 a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " n e n e F dRE i 4 1 n 0 ;b to g t d ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d

13

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 14 of 24

Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 41. FBPA Electronic Funds Transfer/Direct Deposit for Plaintiff: Plaintiff

o j t t tie h i e a s :a i o ti i omai ta in trl a t v e c " b c o h x it c u e ()t na sn r t n h t o " e n e i n e es s bb c n f o s ev d u d r e ..v . 0 a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " n e n e F dRE i 4 1 n 0 ;b to g t d ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 42. D n e Frf hes ei e H a hF n E rl n F r fr lni: e v r i i tr R te ' e l u d nome t om o Pa t eg r s t l if f

Plaintiff objects to this exhibit b c u e ()t o ti i omai ta in trl a t e a s :a i na sn r t n h t o " e n c n f o s ev e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1 n 0 ;b to g t d d ma c na r e n e i n e n ev d under Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains hearsay that

14

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 15 of 24

does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 43. D n e Frf he'R te 'H a hF n C v r etr ae 120 fr e v r i i tr ei e e l u d o e L t D td //3 o eg s r s t e

Plaintiff: Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because: (a) it contains information that is not " l a t v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t r e n e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t ev d d ma c na r e n n ev ei ne u d r v e c " n e Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially d outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 44. D n e Frf he'Poe teA s c t nR te n B n f R l s e v r i i tr rtcv so i i ei me t e ei e a e eg s i ao r t e

Form for Plaintiff: Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because: (a) it contains information ta in trl a t v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti h t o " e n e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t s ev d d ma c na n " l a t v e c " n e Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially r e n ei ne u d r ev d outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 45. 3/14/03 Letter from Steven Garrod to Denver Frf he'Pension Fund i i tr eg s

Board Re: Plaintiff: No objection.

15

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 16 of 24

46.

4/14/03 Letter from Tracy Howard to Civil Service Commission and Fire

D p r n C i R : lnis ei me t No objection. e at t h f e Pa t 'R te n: me e if f r 47. C mp tr r tu wt h n w i nn ts o Pa t 'a p i me t i o ue pi o t i a d rt oe fr lnis p o t n wt n h t e if f n h

Dr. Hessl: No objection. 48. objection. 49. objection. 50. City and County of Denver Work Injury Report dated 2/14/03 concerning 4/8/03 Memo from Dr. Hessl re: Physical Examination of Plaintiff: No Computer printout of hearing test results conducted by Dr. Hessl: No

Pa t 'rfr l D . e sfr lni fr x mi t nfr e r gl s No lnis eer t rH sl Pa t o e a n i o h ai o : if f ao o if f ao n s objection. 51. 2/14/03 Letter to Dr. Hessl from Karen McNeil setting appointment for

Plaintiff: No objection. 52. No objection. 53. Fax cover memo from Karen McNeil to Plaintiff concerning disability 2/25/03 Disability Retirement and Physical Examination Form for Plaintiff:

retirement examination: No objection. 54. Resolution of Firefighters Pension Fund concerning Standards for

Disability Pensions: No objection. 55. 4/22/03 Letter from Garrod to Firefighters Pension Board for consideration

o Pa t 'd a iy ei me t No objection. f lnis i bi rte n: if s l f t r

16

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 17 of 24

56.

4/29/03 Lette t G r df m Frf hes e s nB adfr lni' ro ar r o o i i tr P n i o r o Pa t s eg o if f

Disability Retirement: No objection. 57. 6/3/03 Letter from Tracy Howard to Civil Service Commission and Fire

C i c n en gPa t 'Ds bi R te n: No objection. h f o c ri lnis i iy ei me t e n if f al t r 58. Pa t 'P to to be retired and placed on inactive list of Fire lnis ei n if f t i

Department for disability: No objection. 59. Memo from Rob Brady to Steve Garrod, 12/10/02 regarding conversation

with Plaintiff (same as No. 11): Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because: (a) it contains infr t nta in trl a t v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi omai h t o " e n e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t o s ev d d ma c na " l a t v e c " n e Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is y o ti r e n e i n e u d r n ev d substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 60. Jefferson County Sheriff Offense Report for Case No. 02-24430: Plaintiff

o j t t tie h i e a s :a i o ti i omai ta in trl a t v e c " b c o h x it c u e ()t na sn r t n h t o " e n e i n e es s bb c n f o s ev d u d r e ..v . 0 a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " n e n e F dRE i 4 1 n 0 ;b to g t d ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is

17

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 18 of 24

inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 61. Affidavit for Arrest Warrant for Case No. 02-24430 prepared by Deputy

Roe: Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because: (a) it contains information that is not " l a t v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t r e n e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t ev d d ma c na r e n n ev ei ne u d r v e c " n e Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially d outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 62. Jefferson County Uniform Criminal Summons and Complaint No.

M112785 for Case No. 02M4892: Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because: (a) it contains i omai ta in trl a t v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi n r t n h t o " e n e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t f o s ev d d ma c na " l a t v e c " n e Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is y o ti r e n e i n e u d r n ev d substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the

18

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 19 of 24

exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 63. Advisement and Plea and Notice of Setting, People v. Cadorna,

02M4892: Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because: (a) it contains information that is not " l a t v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t r e n e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t ev d d ma c na r e n n ev ei ne u d r v e c " n e Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially d outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 64. Mandatory Restraining Order Pursuant to § 18-1-1001, C.R.S., People v.

Cadorna, 02M4892: Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because: (a) it contains information ta in trl a t v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti h t o " e n e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t s ev d d ma c na n " l a t v e c " n e Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially r e n ei ne u d r ev d outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807.

19

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 20 of 24

65.

First Judicial District Bond Application Summary Sheet: Plaintiff objects to

tie h i e a s :a i o ti i omai ta in trl a t v e c " n e h x it c u e ()t na sn r t n h t o " e n e i n e u d r s bb c n f o s ev d F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " n e e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t d ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 66. Motion and Order for Deferred Judgment and Summons, People v.

Cadorna, 02M4892: Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because: (a) it contains information ta in trl a t v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti h t o " e n e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t s ev d d ma c na n " l a t v e c " n e Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially r e n ei ne u d r ev d outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 67. Register of Actions Worksheet, People v. Cadorna, 02M4892: Plaintiff

o j t t tie h i e a s :a i o ti i omai ta in trl a t v e c " b c o h x it c u e ()t na sn r t n h t o " e n e i n e es s bb c n f o s ev d

20

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 21 of 24

under Fed.R.Evid. 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " n e 0 n 0 ;b to g t ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 68. Terms and Condition of Sentence, People v. Cadorna, 02M4892:

Plaintiff objects to this exhibit because: (a) it contains infor t nta in trl a t mai h t o " e n o s ev e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1 n 0 ;b to g t d d ma c na r e n e i n e n ev d under Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 69. Victim Impact Statement, People v. Cadorna, 02M4892: Plaintiff objects

t tie h i e a s :a i o ti i omai ta in trl a t v e c " n e o h x it c u e ()t na sn r t n h t o " e n e i n e u d r s bb c n f o s ev d F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " n e e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t d ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger

21

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 22 of 24

of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 70. Binders from Denver Fire Department Human Resources Bureau related

to investigation of alleged misconduct by Plaintiff: Plaintiff objects to this exhibit b c u e ()t o ti i omai ta in trl a t v e c " n e F dRE i e a s :a i na sn r t n h t o " e n e i n e u d r e ..v . c n f o s ev d d 401 and 402; (b) though it may cona " l a t v e c " n e Fed.R.Evid. 401 and ti r e n e i n e u d r n ev d 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807; (e) these were not produced in discovery and have never been seen by Plaintiff or his counsel. 71. Any exhibits listed or used by Plaintiff: Plaintiff objects to any such exhibit

ofrdb D fn a t :a i o ti i omai ta in trl a t v e c " n e f e y ee d n i ()t na sn r t n h t o " e n e i n e u d r e f c n f o s ev d F dRE i 4 1a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " n e e ..v . 0 n 0 ;b to g t d ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger

22

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 23 of 24

of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807. 72. Any exhibits necessary for identification of documents: Plaintiff objects to

a y u he h i f rdb D fn a t :a i o ti i omai ta in trl a t n s c x it f e y ee d n i ()t na sn r t n h t o " e n b oe f c n f o s ev e i n e u d r e ..v . 0 a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " v e c " n e F dRE i 4 1 n 0 ;b to g t d d ma c na r e n e i n e n ev d under Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807; (e) it was within the scope of previous discovery requests yet was never produced by Defendant. 73. Any exhibits for rebuttal or impeachment: Plaintiff objects to any such

exhibit offered by Defn a t :a i o ti i omai ta in trl a t v e c " e d n i ()t na sn r t n h t o " e n e i n e f c n f o s ev d u d r e ..v . 0 a d4 2 ()h u hi y o ti " l a t v e c " n e n e F dRE i 4 1 n 0 ;b to g t d ma c na r e n e i n e u d r n ev d Fed.R.Evid. 401 and 402, its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations

23

Case 1:04-cv-01067-MSK-CBS

Document 101

Filed 05/01/2006

Page 24 of 24

of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence so that it must be excluded under Fed.R.Evid. 403; (c) it contains character evidence that is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(a), 404(b), 608 or 609; (d) it contains hearsay that does not meet the requirements for any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule, Fed.R.Evid. 802, enumerated in Fed.R.Evid. 803 through 807; (e) it was within the scope of previous discovery requests yet was never produced by Defendant. DATED this 1 day of May, 2006. Respectfully submitted,
st

/S/ Mark E. Brennan
Mark E. Brennan, P.C. P.O. Box 2556 Centennial, CO. 80161-2556 (303) 797-7687 Attorney for Plaintiff

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE In compliance with D.C.COLO.LCivR. 6.1(D), the undersigned hereby certifies that, on this 1st day of May, 2006, he served a copy of the foregoing Pa t ' lnis if f O j t n t D fn a t E h i on the following person(s) via electronic mail: b co s o ee d n' x it ei s bs Jack Wesoky, Esq. Office of the City Atty. 201 W. Colfax, Dept. 1108 Denver, CO. 80202

/S/ Mark E. Brennan

24