Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

C.G. v. City of Fort Lupton

United States District Court, Tenth Circuit

January 23, 2014

C.G., a minor child, by his parents and next friends, JASON GALLEGOS, for himself and C.G., and JENNIFER YARBROUGH, for herself and C.G., Plaintiffs,
v.
THE CITY OF FORT LUPTON, COLORADO, KEVIN HALLORAN, individually and in his official capacity as a Fort Lupton Police Officer, CRYSTAL SCHWARTZ, individually and in her official capacity as a Fort Lupton Police Officer, PAUL STIPE, individually and in his official capacity as a Fort Lupton Police Officer, JOHN DOE, individually and his official capacity as a Fort Lupton Police Officer, WELD COUNTY RE-8 SCHOOL DISTRICT, MARK PAYLER, individually and in his official capacity as Superintendent, Weld County RE-8 School District, NATIVITY MILLER, individually and in her official capacity as Principal of Butler Elementary School, STEPHANIE ANDERSON, individually and in her official capacity as Vice-Principal of Butler Elementary School, and CANDACE KENSINGER, individually and in her official capacity as Principal of Fort Lupton Middle School, Defendants.

SECOND TRIAL PREPARATION CONFERENCE ORDER

ROBERT E. BLACKBURN, District Judge.

Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(e), D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.3, and D.C.COLO.LCivR 43.1, the court enters this Second Trial Preparation Conference Order.

IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. That in order to resolve pretrial issues implicating Fed.R.Evid. 702, the following procedural protocol shall be used:

a. That expert reports shall conform in substance to the requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(a)(2)(B) and shall contain and include the following:

1. a complete statement of each expert opinion to be expressed and the bases and reasons therefor;

2. the facts, data, and other information considered by the witness in forming each expert opinion;

3. any exhibits to be used as a summary of or support for each expert opinion;

4. the qualifications of the witness, including a list of all publications authored by the witness within the preceding ten years, stated in a curriculum vitae ("c.v.");

5. the compensation to be paid the expert for the study and testimony; and

6. a listing of any other cases in which the witness has testified as an expert at trial or by deposition within the preceding four years;

b. That all motions raising issues under Fed.R.Evid. 702 as codified and construed shall be filed by July 20, 2014, and marshaled thereafter as prescribed by D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1C.;

c. That for each putative expert witness with respect to whom the movant objects for any reason, the movant shall provide the following:

1. whether the movant contends that the testimony of the expert is unnecessary or irrelevant; and if so, why;

2. whether the movant objects to the qualifications of the witness; and if so, why (stated in detail); and

3. whether the movant objects to any opinion to be offered by the expert; and if so:

a. which opinion; and

b. the specific basis and authority for any objection stated and presented in terms of Fed.R.Evid. 401 and/or 702(a), (b), (c), or (d), i.e., whether the objection impugns the relevancy of the opinion, whether the objection impugns the sufficiency of the facts and data used in support of the opinion, whether the objection impugns the principles and methods on which the expert relied in support of the opinion, or whether the objection impugns how the expert has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case relevant to the opinion; and

d. That for each putative expert witness whose necessity, qualifications, or opinions are opposed by the movant, the party offering the expert shall provide in response to the motion the following:

1. a c.v. for the expert;

2. a statement of each opinion to be offered by the expert that is opposed by the movant; and

3. the relevance and bases for each allegedly objectionable statement to be offered ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.