United States District Court, N.D. California, San Francisco Division
FINAL PRETRIAL ORDER
Beeler United States Magistrate Judge.
court held a final pretrial conference on September 26, 2019.
The court issues the following pretrial order pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(e).
Trial Date and Length of Trial
jury trial will begin on October 15, 2019, in Courtroom B,
15th Floor, U.S. District Court, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San
Francisco, California. The trial will last up to three days
(with opening statements and witness testimony to be
completed during the first two days and closing arguments on
the day or a third day). The trial will be held Tuesday
through Thursday from 8:30 a.m. to approximately 1:30 or 2:00
p.m. (or slightly longer to finish a witness) and will
include two fifteen-minute breaks. Counsel must arrive at
8:15 a.m. to address any issues (such as objections) before
the trial day begins. Once the jury begins deliberations, it
usually stays past 2:00 p.m. Also, Tuesday may run the full
day and will include jury selection, opening statements, and
two or three witnesses, as the day permits.
side will have four hours per side for direct examination of
its witnesses and to cross examine the other side’s
witnesses, including all objections raised during the trial
day. In addition, each side may have up to 30 minutes for an
opening statement and 45 minutes for a closing argument.
Procedures During Trial; Exhibit and Witness Lists;
parties should refer to the court’s May 19, 2017
Pretrial Order for the court’s procedures regarding
the presentation of exhibits, depositions, and witness
testimony during trial. In particular, the court reminds the
parties of its procedures for using deposition
parties will call the witnesses on their separate witness
lists. As discussed at the pretrial conference, if the
parties identify the same witnesses, the defendant will
examine the witnesses when the plaintiff calls them (as
opposed to recalling them).
Claims, Defenses, and Relief Sought
Renee LePage asserts that defendant Tim Reid used excessive
force against her in the vestibule area outside a courtroom
at the Napa County courthouse. Ms. LePage has the following
1. a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim for excessive force in
violation of the Fourth Amendment (against Deputy Reid);
2. a state-law battery claim (against all defendants);
3. a state-law negligence claim (against all defendants); and
4. a claim for excessive force for violation of the Bane Act,
Cal. Civ. Code § 52.1 (against all defendants).
Ms. LePage claims that Defendants County of Napa and the Napa
County Sheriff’s Department are vicariously liable on
her state-law claims (but not her Section 1983 claim) for
defendant Reid’s wrongful acts.
Tim Reid denies that he used excessive force against Ms.
LePage under the Fourth Amendment or was negligent in the
manner he entered the courtroom vestibule in response to an
LePage seeks damages for the following injuries, in an amount
according to proof and that is fair, just, and reasonable:
1. Economic damages;
2. Non-economic damages;
3. Punitive damages against Defendant Reid; and
4. Attorney’s fees and costs.
parties stipulate to the following facts. The parties must
prepare a document reflecting evidentiary stipulations (the
first ten stipulations) in a format that can be read into the
record and introduced as an exhibit.
1. County of Napa is and, at all relevant times was, a public
entity, duly organized and existing under and by virtue of
the laws of the State of California.
2. Defendant County of Napa Sheriff’s Department is a
subdivision of Defendant County of Napa, which employs,
manages, and supervises deputy sheriffs, who are
3. Deputy Reid has been employed as a deputy sheriff with the
County of Napa and the Napa County Sheriff’s Department
since August 31, 2015.
4. Deputy Reid was acting under color of state law at all
times relevant to this action.
5. Deputy Reid was acting within the course and scope of his
employment at all times relevant to this action.
6. On the morning of December 1, 2015, Ms. LePage was
lawfully and peacefully in Department E of the Napa County
Superior Courthouse located at 1111 Third Street, Napa,
California (“Courthouse”) for an unrelated case.
7. As Ms. LePage was exiting Courtroom E, she encountered
Deputy Reid in the vestibule area between the courtroom and
the public hallway.
8. The entrance to Courtroom E from the public hallway
consists of one set of double doors that lead to a vestibule,
followed by another set of double doors that lead to the
9. There is an attorney conference room off of each side of
the vestibule. Each conference room is accessed through a
10. At the time Deputy Reid encountered Ms. LePage, he was
wearing his Department-issued bulletproof vest.
parties stipulate to the following regarding authenticity and
11. All documents produced in this case are presumptively
authentic within the meaning of Federal Rule of Evidence 901.
Nothing in this stipulation limits either party’s right
to object to the authenticity of any particular document
covered by this stipulation if evidence is proffered or
introduced at trial indicating that the document may not in
fact be authentic.
12. The following Trial Exhibits are presumed to be
admissible “business records” under Federal Rule
of Evidence 803(6): LePage0000024, LePage0000027,
LePage0000030, LePage0000032, LePage0000041-42,
LePage0000088, LePage0000090, LePage0000091, LePage0000096,
LePage0000097, LePage0000098, LePage0000100,
LePage0000210, LePage0000216, LePage0000223–24,
LePage0000702–05. Nothing in this stipulation limits
either party’s right to object to specific portions or