Opinion
Civil Action No. 10-cv-02574-MEH
07-20-2012
MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Michael E. Hegarty , United States Magistrate Judge, on July 20, 2012.
Before the Court are Plaintiff s Motion in Limine to Exclude Evidence of Plaintiff's Workers Compensation Claim [filed June 18, 2012; docket #93] and Plaintiff's Motion in Limine Regarding EEOC's Findings on the EEOC Charges of Plaintiff [filed June 18, 2012; docket #94]. According to the Plaintiff, Defendant Feiner does not oppose these motions and, although given the opportunity to do so, Defendant Trinh filed no opposition to the motions within the time period allowed under D.C. Colo. LCivR 7.1C.
Because the Plaintiff has withdrawn her Title VII claims in this case, the Court finds it proper to grant Plaintiff's motion to exclude from evidence any findings made by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Likewise, the Court agrees with the parties that any evidence of the Plaintiff's worker's compensation claim is irrelevant to the allegations underlying the remaining claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress. See Horodyskyj v. Karanian, 32 P.3d 470, 474 (Colo. 2001) ("claims based on sexual harassment and related torts are not barred by the [Worker's Compensation] Act."). The Court further finds that evidence of any benefits Plaintiff has received or may receive under the Worker's Compensation Act would likely comprise a danger of confusing the issues in the case.
Therefore, the Plaintiff's motions are granted.