Vasquez v. City of Idaho Falls
Plaintiff: Luis Augustine Vasquez
Defendant: City of Idaho Falls
Case Number: 4:2016cv00184
Filed: April 29, 2016
Court: US District Court for the District of Idaho
Office: Pocatello - Eastern Office
County: Bonneville - Eastern
Presiding Judge: B. Lynn Winmill
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
July 8, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 100 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE: IN CAMERA REVIEW - Discovery remains CLOSED in this case. Idaho Falls need not respond to Plaintiffs Fourth Set of Discovery Request. Signed by Judge David C. Nye. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (jd)
June 4, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 99 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE: MOTION FOR SANCTIONS, OR ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO COMPEL AND/OR TO REOPEN DISCOVERY ON A LIMITED BASIS (DKT 93 ) - Plaintiff Vasquezs Motion for Sanctions, or Alternatively, Motion to Compel and/or to Reopen Discove ry on a Limited Basis (Dkt. 93 ) is GRANTED in PART and DENIED in PART, as outlined above. 2. Idaho Falls is ordered to provide its response to Plaintiffs Fourth Set of Discovery Requestsin both in hardcopy and in text-searchable PDF formatto the Court for in-camera review on or before Friday, June 19, 2020. Signed by Judge David C. Nye. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (jd)
June 3, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 98 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE: DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO LIMIT CLAIMS FOR TRIAL (Dkt. 83 ) AND MOTION FOR EXTENSION (Dkt. 92 ) - Idaho Falls Motion in Limine to Limit Claims in Trial (Dkt. 83 ) is GRANTED in PART and DENIED in PART. As laid out above, the Court grants Idaho Falls motion to the extent it will exclude jury instructions or special verdict questions concerning a Title VII hostile work environment or IPEPA retaliatory discharge claim. The Court denies Idaho Falls Mot ion to the extent it will not issue a blanket exclusion of any argument or evidence that might pertain to those claims. Vasquezs Motion for an Extension of Time to File Response (Dkt 92 ) is DENIED. Signed by Judge David C. Nye. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (jd)
April 13, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 71 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - Idaho Falls Motion in Limine to Exclude Certain Evidence from Trial and to Establish Admissibility of Relevant Written Witness Statements Sanctions (Dkt. 61 ) is DENIED as to excluding evidence concerning Vasquezs alle ged missing notebook/calendars and to ruling witness statements admissible as a matter of law but is GRANTED as to excluding Vasquezs economic reports. Idaho Falls Motion in Limine to Prohibit Witness Testimony at Trial (Dkt. 62 ) is DENIED. Vasquez s Motion to Present Testimony by Remote Transmission, or, Alternatively, for Leave to Take Remote, Video-Recorded Deposition for Use at Trial (Dkt. 66 ) is GRANTED. The parties must inform the Court by April 20, 2020, whether they prefer Daris Powell testify live remotely or via a video deposition. Signed by Judge David C. Nye. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (jd)
March 1, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 41 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration (Dkt. 37 ) is DENIED. Signed by Judge David C. Nye. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (jp)
December 20, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 33 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The Citys Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 20 ) is GRANTED on the following four claims: (1) racial discrimination in violation of Title VII; (2) racialdiscrimination in violation of the IHRA ; (3) retaliatory discharge in violation of Title VII; and (4) retaliatory discharge in violation of the IPEPA. 2. Any remaining claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack ofsubject matter jurisdiction. 3. The Citys Motion to Strike (Dkt. 28 ) is GRANTED IN PART consistent with the above analysis. 4. Vasquezs Motion to Strike (Dkt. 29 ) is DENIED AS MOOT. 5. The Court will enter judgment separately in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 58. Signed by Judge David C. Nye. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjs)
Access additional case information on PACER

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 Idaho District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Vasquez v. City of Idaho Falls
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Luis Augustine Vasquez
Represented By: Richard A Hearn
Represented By: T Jason Wood
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: City of Idaho Falls
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?