Sparkman et al v. Thompson et al
| Phillip Darrell Sparkman and Ralph Dyer |
| Randy Thompson |
| 7:2008cv00001 |
| December 30, 2007 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
| Pikeville Office |
| Knott |
| Gregory F. Van Tatenhove |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination) |
| Plaintiff |
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
154
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: (1) Dft prohibited from introducing evidence to show Pla Sparkmans alleged failure to mitigate damages. (2) Dfts Motion for Reconsideration (DE 138 ) is DENIED because the Dft has presented no evidence that Pla Sparkman s unemployment records show that substantially equivalent positions were available to him and thus, this evidence is not relevant to Sparkmans alleged failure to mitigate damages. (3) Pla Sparkman is cautioned, however, that if he opens the door at trial, evidence of other available employment or his receipt of unemployment benefits could become relevant notwithstanding the Courts rulings on these issues. If the Dft believes that such evidence has become relevant, he must seek the Courts permis sion before presenting the evidence to the jury. 4) Dfts Motion to Quash Subpoenas and Motion for a Protective Order (DE 139 ) is DENIED AS MOOT because the Plaintiffs indicated at the January 18, 2011 status conference that they no longer have a need to depose either Harold Mullins or Rhett Gibson. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 1/19/11.(MJY)cc: COR
|
|
Filing
130
OPINION & ORDER: the defendants Motion in Limine to Exclude the Proposed Testimony of Larry Lynch (DE 113 ) is DENIED. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 12/14/10.(MJY)cc: COR
|
|
Filing
124
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER:(1) Dfts Motion to Bifurcate (DE 104 ) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: (a) Dfts Motion is GRANTED to the extent that Pla Dyer is prohibited from amending his complaint to add a separate cause of action b ased on the November 2007 layoff; and (b) Dfts Motion is DENIED to the extent that it seeks to bifurcate the trial of this matter. (2) Furthermore, the Court finds that the November 2007 layoff, which has been disclosed extensively in discovery, is admissible evidence as to the Dfts intent with respect to the alleged discriminatory acts against Pla Dyer. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 9/16/10.(MJY)cc: COR
|
|
Filing
122
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: (1) Plaintiffs Motion in Limine Regarding the Collateral Source Rule (Rec. 83 ) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: (a) Plaintiffs Motion is GRANTED to the extent that Defendant Thompson is prohibited from introducing evidence or arguing that any damagesawarded on either the federal or state law claims should be offset or reduced by amounts Plaintiffs received as unemployment benefits; and (b) Plaintiffs Motion is DENIED in all other respects. (2) Furthermore, the parties are hereby put on notice to bring their calendars to the hearing set for September 14, 2010, for the purpose of determining suitable pretrial and trial dates. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 9/9/10.(MJY)cc: COR
|
|
Filing
94
OPINION & ORDER: (1) Defendant Thompsons motion for summary judgment (Rec. 49 ) is DENIED; and (2) Plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment (Rec. 52 ) is DENIED. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 3/25/10.(MJY)cc: COR
|
|
Filing
46
OPINION & ORDER: The Defendant's 35 MOTION to Stay is hereby DENIED. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on July 6, 2009. (AWD) cc: COR
|
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 Kentucky Eastern 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.
