Rentas v. The City of New York et al
| Axel Rentas |
| The City of New York, John Ruffin, Diana Baker, Kevin Parker, Mills Charles, Elisio Perez, Sharon Clayton, Darryll Lago, George Ruppel, Richard Serrano, Walter Nin and C.O.'s John Doe #1-10 |
| 1:2010cv06242 |
| August 19, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Bronx |
| Unassigned |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| 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
88
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S AND DEFENDANT'S MOTIONS IN LIMINE granting in part and denying in part 81 Motion in Limine; granting in part and denying in part 84 Motion in Limine. For the reasons stated on the record, each parties' motion in limine is granted in part and denied in part. On several different issues, I postponed making a ruling until the evidence is presented at trial. For these issues, the parties shall not refer to the relevant evide nce in their opening statements. The Clerk shall mark the motions (Doc. Nos. 81 and 84) terminated, Plaintiff will reformulate the caption to drop the City of New York as a party and to remove the qualification as to the capacity in which individual defendants are sued. The issue of respondent superior can be regulated by motion after verdict to the extent appropriate. (Signed by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein on 9/25/2013) (mro)
|
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 New York Southern 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.
