WASHINGTON v. BEARD et al, No. 2:2007cv03462 - Document 100 (E.D. Pa. 2012)
Court Description: ORDER THAT THE MOTION IN LIMINE IN LIGHT OF THE RECENT DECISION IN CULLEN V. PINHOLSTER IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, UPON CONSIDERATION OF THE RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO PRECLUDE THE EXPERT TESTIMONY OF DR. STEVEN PENROD, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE MOTION IS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE WITH THE RIGHT TO OBJECT AFTER A DAUBERT HEARING, ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LAWRENCE F. STENGEL ON 3/27/12. 3/28/12 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.(fb)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ANTHONY WASHINGTON, Petitioner, v. JEFFREY BEARD, Commissioner, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, et al., Respondents. : : : : : : : : : CIVIL ACTION No. 07-3462 THIS IS A CAPITAL CASE ORDER AND NOW, this 27th day of March 2012, upon consideration of the Respondent s Motion In Limine in Light of the Recent Decision in Cullen v. Pinholster (Doc. No. 87) and all responses and replies thereto, it is hereby ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. It is FURTHER ORDERED, upon consideration of the Respondent s Motion to Preclude the Expert Testimony of Dr. Steven Penrod (Doc. No. 86) and Petitioner s Response thereto (Doc. No. 93), it is hereby ORDERED that the motion is DENIED without prejudice with the right to object after a Daubert hearing, which will be scheduled in a subsequent court Order. BY THE COURT: /s/LAWRENCE F. STENGEL LAWRENCE F. STENGEL, J.
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
