Free Order to Show Cause - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:03-cv-02633-PSF-PAC

Document 251

Filed 06/28/2006

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 03-cv-02633-PSF-PAC (Consolidated with 04-cv-00319-PSF-PAC) LILLIAN BARTON, Plaintiff, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, OFFICER R. BLEA, Badge No. 99006, OFFICER N. SAGEN, Badge No.96-021, OFFICER JOHN DOE, MAYOR JOHN HICKENLOOPER, in his Official capacity, WELLINGTON WEBB, as former Mayor, in his Official capacity only, GERALD R. WHITMAN, in his Official capacity as Chief of Police, City and County of Denver, J. WALLACE WORTHAM, JR., former Denver City Attorney, in his Official capacity, and CHRIS RAMSEY, former Denver Deputy City Attorney, in his Official capacity only, Defendants. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER; RICHARD BLEA; NICK SAGAN; JOSH VASCONCELLOS; MAYOR JOHN HICKENLOOPER; WELLINGTON WEBB; GERALD R. WHITMAN; RUDY SANDOVAL; J. WALLACE WORTHAM, JR; and CHRIS RAMSEY, Defendants.

Case 1:03-cv-02633-PSF-PAC

Document 251

Filed 06/28/2006

Page 2 of 3

ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT' MOTION S S IN LIMINE AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED

On June 14, 2006, the Court entered a minute order in this case striking and denying plaintiff' pro se Motion to Correct Paragraph 2 of Plaintiff' Objections s s (Dkt. # 244), and advising plaintiff that as counsel has now appeared for her, she is DIRECTED to not file any further motions in this case other than through her counsel. Plaintiff was expressly advised that " she fails to comply with this order and continues [i]f to file pro se motions, the Court will consider additional sanctions including possibly, the dismissal of her case." (Dkt. # 245) On June 26, 2006, plaintiff filed her Response to Defendant' Motion in Limine, s which is not signed by counsel, but which is signed by plaintiff only over a signature block stating " Lillian Barton responding to Defendants Motion in Limine of June 6th 2006 as herself."(Dkt. # 249 at 12). It is apparent to the Court from this signature line, as well as from the content of the response, that plaintiff authored the document and that plaintiff signed and filed the document without her counsel' signature contrary to s this Court' Order of June 14, 2006. s On June 12, 2006, this Court granted plaintiff' motion to continue the trial in this s case, which had been set for June 26, 2006, on the grounds that plaintiff would obtain counsel to represent her, and that counsel need additional time to prepare for trial. On that date, A. Thomas Elliot, Jr. entered his appearance for plaintiff and represented 2

Case 1:03-cv-02633-PSF-PAC

Document 251

Filed 06/28/2006

Page 3 of 3

to the Court that he would be representing her in this case. Relying on that representation and the circumstances before it, the Court continued the trial until July 10, 2006. Since the appearance of Mr. Elliot, plaintiff has twice filed pleadings pro se, despite being represented by counsel, and once in defiance of this Court' Order of s June 14, 2006. Plaintiff was cautioned that if she persisted in such conduct her case was subject to being dismissed. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that Plaintiff' Response to Defendants Motion s In Limine (Dkt. # 249) is STRICKEN and that plaintiff' counsel show cause in writing s by July 5, 2006 why this case should not be dismissed as a sanction for plaintiff' s personal failure to abide by this Court' June 14, 2006 Order. s DATED: June 28, 2006 BY THE COURT:

s/ Phillip S. Figa ________________________________ Phillip S. Figa United States District Judge

3