Free Motion for Leave to File - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :04-cv—00593-GIVIS Document 55 Filed 08/15/2005 Page 1 of 2 I
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ·
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
In re INACOM CORP., et al., Bankruptcy Case No. 00-2426 (PJW)
INACOM CORP., on behalf of all affiliated Civil Action No. 04-593 (GMS)
Debtors, [Bk Adv. Case No. 02-3960 (P.TW)]
Plaintiff, .
v.
INGRAM ENTERTAINMENT, INC., as . n
successor in interest to NASHVILLE I
COMPUTER LIQUIDATORS,
Defendant.
AND RELATED THIRD PARTY
ACTION. I
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE MOTIONS IN LIMINE
Plaintiff Inacom Corp. files this Motion For Leave to File Motions in Limine in an is
abundance of caution to ensure that it is in compliance with the Court’s pretrial procedures. In
accordance with the Court’s form of Final Pretrial Order, Plaintiff has identified and filed its
motions in limine concurrently with the filing of the Pretrial Order. (The motions in limine are I
also identified in Exhibit A hereto.) Plaintiff has also heard, however, that the Court does not
always accept motions in limine in actions before the Court as a result of withdrawal of the
reference from the Bankruptcy Court. As such, Plaintiff has taken this extraordinary step to seek
the Court’s leave to file its four motions in limine in this action.
Plaintiff submits that the motions in limine will greatly assist the Court in streamlining
the trial of this matter by excluding inappropriate evidence. The Court has authority to exclude I
evidence based on a motion in limine, pursuant to its "inherent power to manage the course of I
trlals." Luce v. United States, 469 U.S. 38, 41, 105 S.Ct. 460, 463, fn.2 (1984); United States v.
42125-c0sroocs_oa:r 102.41.1

Case 1:04-cv—00593-Gl\/IS Document 55 Filed 08/15/2005 Page 2 of 2 _
Holmquist, 36 F.3d 154, 163 (l" Cir. 1994). Motions in limine are well recognized in the case
law as a vehicle for "advance planning [that] helps both parties and the court." United States v.
C00k, 608 F.2d 1175, 1186 (9m Cir. 1979). See Pctdillas v. Stork-Gamco, Inc., 186 F.3d 412, 417 -
Q J (3rd Cir. 1999).
Plaintiff thus respectfully requests that the Court grant leave to file and pursue its motions I
in limine in this matter.
Dated: August , 2005 PACHULSKI, STANG, ZIEHL, YOUNG, JONES n
& WEINTRAUB P.C.
Laura Davis Jones (Bar No. 2436)
Sandra McLamb (Bar No. 4283)
. 919 North Market Street, 16th Floor -
Wilmington, DE 19899-8705 (Courier 19801) p
Telephone: (302) 652-4100
Facsimile: (302) 652-4400
Andrew W. Caine (CA Bar No. 110345) J
Jeffrey P. Nolan (CA Bar No. 158923)
10100 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 1100
Los Angeles, Califomia 90067
Telephone: (310) 277-6910 .
Facsimile: (310) 201-0760
Counsel for Plaintiff, INACOM CORP. ;
4212se0sunocs_¤E;11cs41.1 2

Case 1:04-cv-00593-GMS

Document 55

Filed 08/15/2005

Page 1 of 2

Case 1:04-cv-00593-GMS

Document 55

Filed 08/15/2005

Page 2 of 2