Defendants' Second Motion in Limine
Public Court Documents
November 14, 1980
2 pages
Cite this item
-
Case Files, Bolden v. Mobile Hardbacks and Appendices. Defendants' Second Motion in Limine, 1980. 086404ae-cdcd-ef11-8ee9-6045bddb7cb0. LDF Archives, Thurgood Marshall Institute. https://ldfrecollection.org/archives/archives-search/archives-item/d0993181-a0e2-460c-ab6d-c821f1427a70/defendants-second-motion-in-limine. Accessed October 30, 2025.
Copied!
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
WILEY L. BOLDEN, et al., Ww
Plaintiffs, §
VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO: 75-297-P
CITY OF MOBILE, et al., §
Defendants. §
DEFENDANTS' SECOND MOTION IN LIMINE
Defendants respectfully move the court as follows:
l. To withhold any further proceedings in the above-styled
cause and to direct Plaintiffs to make a showing to the court of
any evidence that they intend to offer for the purpose of proving that
the Alabama State Legislature is currently maintaining the City
of Mobile's at-large form of government for the purpose of diluting
the vote of black citizens;
2. That Plaintiffs be instructed not to produce broad,
generalized evidence in he form of conclusory statements;
3. To instruct Plaintiffs to state with specificity the
documents, persons, and other forms of evidence by which they intend
to prove that the Alabama State Legislature is currently maintaining
the City of Mobile's at-large form of government for the purpose of
diluting the vote of black citizens;
4. That Plaintiffs be instructed that they may not rely on
any evidence that has been excluded pursuant to Defendants' motion
in limine previously filed in this court;
5. That Plaintiffs be granted a reasonable time during which
discovery as allowed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure may be
conducted; and, 2
6. Following discovery by Plaintiffs and reasohable notice to
the respective parties, a hearing will be conducted by this court to
determine whether the evidence presented by Plaintiffs, if. subsequently
proved, would meet the evidentiary standard enunciated by the United
(24) nesting
-
States Supreme Court.
C. B. ARENDALL, JR.
Attorney for Defendants
City of Mobile, et al.
WILLIAM C. TIDWELL, III
Attorney for Defendants
City of Mobile, et al.
DEFENDANTS RESPECTFULLY REQUEST ORAL ARGUMENT.
OF COUNSEL:
HAND, ARENDALL, BEDSOLE, GREAVES & JOHNSTON =
Post Office Box 123
Mobile, Alabama 36601
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I do hereby certify that I have on this | #T day of November,
1980, served a true and correct copy of the foregoing pleading on
counsel for all parties of record by placing same in the United States
mail, properly addressed and first class postage prepaid.
bil He nr or