Case Information
*1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA __________________________________________ NICOLE BOLDER, :
Plaintiff, : : v. : Civil No. 5:23-cv-05138-JMG : OFFICER THOMAS BRECKER, : Defendant. : __________________________________________ ORDER
AND NOW , this 31 st day of October, 2025, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 1. Upon consideration of Defendant’s Motion to Strike and/or Motion in Limine to
preclude Dr. John Peyton (ECF No. 58), Plaintiff’s Opposition (ECF No. 69), the parties’ responses to the Court’s request to show cause (ECF Nos. 72-73), and the parties’ arguments at the Final Pretrial Conference held on October 29, 2025, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion (ECF No. 58) is GRANTED . Dr. Peyton is PRECLUDED from testifying at trial.
2. Upon consideration of Defendant’s Motion to Strike and/or Motion in Limine to partially preclude Larry Rotenberg, M.D. (ECF No. 59), Plaintiff’s Opposition (ECF No. 71), the parties’ responses to the Court’s request to show cause (ECF Nos. 72-73), and the parties’ arguments at the Final Pretrial Conference, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion (ECF No. 59) is DENIED as untimely.
3. Upon consideration of Defendant’s Motion in Limine to partially preclude Darrin Porcher, Ed.D. (ECF No. 57), Plaintiff’s Opposition (ECF No. 70), the parties’ responses to the Court’s request to show cause (ECF Nos. 72-73), and the parties’ arguments at the Final Pretrial *2 Conference, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion (ECF No. 57) is DENIED as untimely.
4. Upon consideration of Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine to partially preclude Stephen Mechanick, M.D. (ECF No. 65), Defendant’s Opposition (ECF No. 68), the parties’ responses to the Court’s request to show cause (ECF Nos. 72-73), and the parties’ arguments at the Final Pretrial Conference, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff ’s Motion (ECF No. 65) is DENIED as untimely.
5. Upon the Court’s sua sponte review of Dr. Rotenberg’s expert report (ECF No. 59-2), the parties’ untimely briefings on the same (ECF Nos. 59, 71), and the parties’ arguments at the Final Pretrial Conference, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Dr. Rotenberg is PRECLUDED from testifying to the following:
a. “Instead, he treated her as a second class citizen, a criminal, and even as she says ‘an animal.’” b. “[Plaintiff’s] conviction that had she been white, she would have had different treatment, seems plausible.” c. “Her pathetic state, in the cold, with her therapy dog locked in her car, seemingly drew sympathy from the tow truck driver.” d. “But not from officer Brecker, who threatened to arrest her, and in the process of these threats, used vulgar language in addressing her and used racially stereotyped comments.”
e. “Officer's Brecker's attempt at undoing what he had done and said, was too little and too late.” Dr. Rotenberg is otherwise qualified, and his remaining opinions are ADMITTED . *3 6. Upon the Court’s sua sponte review of Dr. Porcher’s expert report (ECF No. 57-2), the parties’ untimely briefings on the same (ECF Nos. 57, 70), and the parties’ arguments at the Final Pretrial Conference, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Dr. Porcher is PRECLUDED from testifying at trial.
7. Upon the Court’s sua sponte review of Dr. Mechanick’s expert report (ECF No. 65- 4), the parties’ untimely briefings on the same (ECF Nos. 65, 68), and the parties’ arguments at the Final Pretrial Conference, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Dr. Mechanick is ADMITTED to testify at trial.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ John M. Gallagher
JOHN M. GALLAGHER
United States District Court Judge