Free Motion in Limine - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3101 North Central Avenue ­ Suite 720 Phoenix, Arizona 85012

GAONA LAW FIRM
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

3101 NORTH CENTRAL AVE, SUITE 720 PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85012 _____________

(602) 230-2636 Fax (602) 230-1377

David F. Gaona, State Bar No. 007391 Nicole Seder Cantelme, State Bar No. 021320 Attorneys for Defendants APS, Doug McDonald and Donald Wilson IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA JAMES W. FIELD and SUSAN F. FIELD, husband and wife, Plaintiffs, vs. LA PAZ COUNTY, et al., Defendants. Defendants Arizona Public Service Company, Doug McDonald and Donald Wilson ("APS Defendants"), respectfully move the Court, in limine, pertaining to the issue of Plaintiff's pro se status. In particular, APS Defendants request that before evidentiary presentation to the jury, the Court and the parties fashion appropriate trial ground rules concerning the scope of the legal issues, issues of relevancy and, objections and protocol. In particular, pretrial orders are requested from the Court including perhaps a preliminary instruction concerning objections and the probability of a greater number of objections the jury may hear due to the pro se status of the Plaintiff balanced against the need for the Defendants to protect the record. No. CIV03-02214 PHX SRB APS DEFENDANTS' MOTION IN LIMINE RELATING TO PLAINTIFF'S PRO SE STATUS

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

GAONA LAW FIRM

Case 2:03-cv-02214-SRB

Document 176

Filed 05/22/2006

Page 1 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3101 North Central Avenue ­ Suite 720 Phoenix, Arizona 85012

Throughout the proceedings leading up to trial in this matter, Plaintiff Field has zealously represented his interests and demonstrated persistence in articulating issues. Many of the Plaintiff's issues, however, have been removed from this case as a result of the Court's rulings on the outstanding defense motions for summary judgment. APS anticipates that despite those rulings, Plaintiff Field will engage in concerted effort to argue and/or ask questions of witnesses relative to issues that are no longer part of this case and, thus, not relevant. Correspondingly, that will place the Defendants in the position, which will quickly become untenable, to lodge numerous objections that may very well all be sustained. As the Court is aware, although a basis for an objection may exist making the objection sustainable, there are reasons why objections are not articulated, especially in jury trials, including an inappropriate conclusion by the Jury that the party objecting (more pronounced relative to number of objections) is trying to hide the truth. In this case, however, in order to not expand the issues that have previously been ruled upon and protect the record, it will be incumbent upon defense counsel to object and protect the record and not allow the door to other issues opened. In that vein, to the extent these matters are not dealt with early on in this matter and to the extent the Plaintiff is permitted and/or is persistent in attempting to bring in matters that are no longer relevant, defense counsel will be placed, on a question by question basis, in the untenable position of having to object and risk a negative reception by the jury. For all the foregoing reasons, APS respectfully moves the Court for its order, in limine, relating to the appropriate handling of these inevitable scenarios.

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

GAONA LAW FIRM

2 Case 2:03-cv-02214-SRB Document 176 Filed 05/22/2006 Page 2 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3101 North Central Avenue ­ Suite 720 Phoenix, Arizona 85012

DATED this 22nd day of May, 2006. GAONA LAW FIRM /s/ David F. Gaona David F. Gaona Nicole Seder Cantelme Attorneys for APS, Doug McDonald and Donald Wilson

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

GAONA LAW FIRM

3 Case 2:03-cv-02214-SRB Document 176 Filed 05/22/2006 Page 3 of 4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3101 North Central Avenue ­ Suite 720 Phoenix, Arizona 85012

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on May 22, 2006, I electronically transmitted the attached document to the Clerk's Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants: John Masterson, Esq. [email protected] and Jennifer Holsman, Esq. [email protected] Attorneys for La Paz County Defendants I further certify that on May 22, 2006, I mailed a copy of the foregoing document to Plaintiffs pro per: James W. Field Post Office Box 248 Salome, Arizona 85348

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

GAONA LAW FIRM

/s/ David F. Gaona

4 Case 2:03-cv-02214-SRB Document 176 Filed 05/22/2006 Page 4 of 4