From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hill v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transp. Auth.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Feb 29, 2012
NO. 09-5463 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 29, 2012)

Opinion

NO. 09-5463

02-29-2012

GEORGE HILL and DAVID ELLIS v. SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY


CIVIL ACTION


ORDER

AND NOW, this 28th day of February, 2012, upon consideration of the motions in limine of Ellis and SEPTA and the parties' responses thereto, it is ORDERED that SEPTA's motion is GRANTED with respect to:

1) Darlene Godwin's opinion that Joseph Rollo is racially prejudiced;
2) Denise Greene's testimony concerning Rollo's statements from 1996 or 1997;
3) Bobby Davis's hearsay testimony;
4) Reginald Goldston's hearsay testimony;
5) Carlos Ortiz's testimony concerning Rollo's statements from an unknown time; and
6) Jeffrey Brooks's testimony.
SEPTA's motion is DENIED in all other respects.

It is further ORDERED that Ellis's motion is GRANTED with respect to the decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review. Judgment on Ellis's motion with respect to the arbitration award is reserved. Ellis is directed to submit a copy of the arbitration award prior to trial.

______________

THOMAS N. O'NEILL, JR., J.


Summaries of

Hill v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transp. Auth.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Feb 29, 2012
NO. 09-5463 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 29, 2012)
Case details for

Hill v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transp. Auth.

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE HILL and DAVID ELLIS v. SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Feb 29, 2012

Citations

NO. 09-5463 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 29, 2012)