Abel v. Oceanic Arcata, LP dba Red Roof Inn
- Susan Illston
- 3:17-cv-03734
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 5
In Abel v. Oceanic Arcata, Judge Illston set trial procedures, bifurcated claims, and granted several evidence motions without deciding the underlying case.
Sherie Abel, Oceanic Arcata LP, 4975 Valley West LLC, their counsel, witnesses, and the conduct of the scheduled jury trial.
What happened
In Abel v. Oceanic Arcata, the court prepared the case for a seven-day jury trial beginning February 18, 2020. It set an eight-person jury, limits on questioning and trial presentations, deadlines for exhibits and jury-instruction disputes, and a detailed trial schedule.
The court separated the damages claims against Oceanic Arcata from the injunctive-relief claims against 4975 Valley West LLC, with the damages trial first. It barred evidence of Abel’s prior litigation history unless the parties first made an offer of proof and received court approval, and it granted Abel’s motions to exclude undisclosed defenses and expert testimony offering legal conclusions. The court also granted Oceanic Arcata’s motion concerning Dr. Leslie Ballard to the extent that she would be excluded if Abel did not produce her medical records by February 10, 2020. The provided text does not show the ruling on another defense motion seeking offers of proof about proposed medical witnesses.
Judge Susan Illston also ordered Abel to submit an updated witness list and allowed her to file a short motion about the collateral-source rule. This order addressed trial management and evidence; it did not decide the parties’ underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Abel v. Oceanic Arcata, LP dba Red Roof Inn · No. 3:17-cv-03734
- Susan Illston
- Jan. 28, 2020
Background
The court held a final pretrial conference on January 28, 2020, in a case scheduled for a jury trial beginning February 18, 2020. The opinion states that all parties were represented by counsel. The order resolved jury, voir dire, jury-instruction, exhibit, bifurcation, trial-time, scheduling, and evidentiary matters.
Trial structure and scheduling
The court ordered an eight-member jury and four peremptory challenges for each side. It would conduct general questioning of prospective jurors, while counsel for each side could question the panel for up to 20 minutes total. The parties were directed to cooperate on a neutral statement of the case for voir dire.
The court ordered the parties to continue meeting and conferring about disputed jury instructions and to submit a concise statement of their remaining disagreements. The parties also had to submit numbered trial exhibits in binders and provide three sets to the court.
The court granted Oceanic Arcata’s request to separate the damages claims against Oceanic Arcata from the injunctive-relief claims against 4975 Valley West LLC. The damages claims would be tried first before a jury, and the court would set a later schedule for resolving the injunctive-relief claims. The order states that counsel for 4975 Valley West was not required to attend the damages trial.
The court set a seven-day trial. Each side received up to 45 minutes for opening statements, 12.5 hours for presenting evidence—including examination of witnesses and exhibits—and one hour for closing argument. Jury selection was scheduled to begin February 18, 2020, at 8:30 a.m.; the order also set the daily trial hours and breaks.
Motions in limine
A motion in limine is a request to decide before trial whether particular evidence or arguments may be presented to the jury. The order addresses five such motions, but the provided text ends before the ruling on the fifth motion.
1. Abel’s motion about prior litigation and settlements. The court ordered that no evidence of Abel’s prior litigation history could be offered or presented to the jury before an offer of proof and specific court approval. The order does not label this ruling as a grant or denial of the motion.
2. Abel’s motion to exclude undisclosed or unpleaded affirmative defenses. The court stated that this motion was GRANTED.
3. Abel’s motion to prevent expert testimony offering legal conclusions. The court stated that this motion was GRANTED. The motion concerned proposed expert testimony about what the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines require and which provisions apply.
4. Oceanic Arcata’s motion to exclude Dr. Leslie Ballard. Abel offered Dr. Ballard’s testimony about her examination, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of Abel and described her as a treating physician. Oceanic Arcata argued that Dr. Ballard was neither a treating doctor with supporting medical records nor a properly disclosed expert. The court ordered Abel to produce Dr. Ballard’s medical records by February 10, 2020. If no records were produced, Dr. Ballard would be excluded. The motion was GRANTED to that extent.
5. Oceanic Arcata’s motion seeking offers of proof about proposed medical witnesses. The provided opinion text begins this section but does not include the court’s ruling.
Other matters and disposition
The court ordered Abel to file an updated, shortened witness list by February 10, 2020, to more accurately identify the witnesses she would actually call and eliminate redundancies. The court also allowed Abel to file a four-page motion about the collateral-source rule by that date.
This was a final pretrial scheduling and evidence order. It managed the upcoming trial and ruled on pretrial motions; it did not decide the merits of the underlying claims. The classification is therefore procedural_order.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.