Ambert v. Stafford
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Ruth Bermudez Montenegro (author)
Analysis
Plaintiff Gene Ambert filed a motion requesting the court to take judicial notice of various documents, including case dockets, websites, and statutes, without explaining their relevance to his claims. The court denied the motion, finding that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate how the requested items were related to his claims or subject to judicial notice in the absence of a pending motion requiring evidentiary determinations.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Motion for Judicial Notice denied“Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion is DENIED.” | agree with court The court correctly applied Federal Rule of Evidence 201, which requires that a fact be capable of accurate and ready determination and not subject to reasonable dispute. Furthermore, the court correctly noted that judicial notice is not appropriate in a vacuum and requires a connection to a pending proceeding or claim. Because the plaintiff did not explain the relevance of the documents and there was no pending motion requiring evidentiary determinations, the denial was procedurally and substantively appropriate. |
The order itself: sound — The order is concise and directly addresses the procedural deficiency in the plaintiff's motion. It correctly cites the governing rule (FRE 201) and a persuasive district court case (Stevens) to support the conclusion that judicial notice requires a nexus to the pending claims. The reasoning is sufficient to justify the denial.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GENE AMBERT, Case No.: 3:22-cv-00996-RBM-DEB FL DOC #A50783, 12 ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S Petitioner, 13 MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE vs. 14 [Doc. 44] UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; 15 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY 16 GENERAL M. GARLAND; UNITED STATES MARSHAL SERVICE; 17 MARSHALL STEVEN C. 18 STAFFORD; and FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, 19 Respondents. 20 21 22 On February 20, 2024, Petitioner/Plaintiff Gene Ambert (“Plaintiff”) filed a Motion 23 for Judicial Notice (“Motion”). (Doc. 44.) In his Motion, Plaintiff requests that the Court 24 take judicial notice of various “reference materials,” including cases, websites, docket 25 sheets, Florida State Department of Corrections Rules, and Florida statutes. (Id. at 1.) 26 Specifically, Plaintiff requests that the Court take judicial notice of this case’s docket sheet, 27 Plaintiff’s civil cases in other courts, Plaintiff’s law library call outs, Plaintiff’s other 28 1 || motions filed with this Court, the State of Florida Department of Corrections website, the 2 || Blackwater River Correctional Facility website, and more. (Jd. at 2-4.) 3 “A judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is 4 || either (1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court or (2) capable 5 || of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably 6 || be questioned.” Fed. R. Evid. 201(b). “A court shall take judicial notice if requested by a 7 || party and supplied with the necessary information.” Fed. R. Evid. 201(d). However, the 8 ||Court cannot take judicial notice of facts or documents “in a vacuum.” Stevens v. Beard, 9 || Case No. 1:17-cv-01002-AWI-SAB (PC), 2023 WL 2143219, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 21, 10 2023). “A request for judicial notice must be made in the context of some proceeding in 11 || which the facts are to be placed in evidence.” Id. 12 Here, as in Stevens, Plaintiff requests that the Court take judicial notice of several 13 ||documents and proceedings without explaining how or why these items are to be placed 14 evidence or how they are related to his claims. Currently, there is no pending motion 15 requiring evidentiary determinations. Therefore, “Plaintiff has not demonstrated that these 16 documents are related to his claims or that such documents are subject to judicial notice.” 17 ||Id. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion is DENIED. 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 |}/DATE: April 18, 2024 20 et Bermisl, Moitrygys 7] HON. RUTH BERMUDBEZ MONTENEGRO UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2