McKibben v. Sedona Police Department et al
| Timothy McKibben |
| William Knuth, Raymond Cota, Sedona, City of and Unknown Parties |
| 3:2017cv08009 |
| January 17, 2017 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Prescott Division Office |
| Coconino |
| John W Sedwick |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Both |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
134
ORDER and Opinion granting in part 102 Motion in Limine. The court holds that the summaries are hearsay. The motion at docket 102 is granted in part, but a ruling is reserved with respect to the admissibility of the summaries under Fed. R. Evid. 803(6). Signed by Judge John W Sedwick on 7/10/18. (JWS)
|
|
Filing
127
ORDER re 102 Motion in Limine to exclude evidence regarding department of public safety interview summaries. The motion is DENIED without prejudice to a request for a limited purpose instruction to the jury with respect to evidence about Plaintiff offered for a proper purpose, such as the calculation of damages or general background information about Plaintiff. Signed by Judge John W Sedwick on 6/24/18. (JWS)
|
|
Filing
125
ORDER granting 101 Motion in Limine to exclude evidence of payment of Plaintiff's Emergency medical bills by defendant; granting 103 Motion in Limine to exclude prior citizen complaints against Defendant Officer Knuth. Signed by Judge John W Sedwick on 6/21/18. (JWS)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
