IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE VIRGIN ISLANDS 
 
DIVISION OF ST. CROIX 
 
FRANK V. POLLARA GROUP LLC  
 
) 
And FRANK C. POLLARA, individually,  
) 
No. 9-60 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
) 
 
Plaintiffs, 
 
v. 
 
OCEAN VIEW INVESTMENT HOLDING, 
LLC, f/k/a SOUTHGATE CROSSING 
INVESTMENTS, LLC, OMEI GROUP LLC,  
LUCY CHENG, and MATT DUBOIS, 
 
 
Defendants. 
 
MEMORANDUM ORDER 
 
Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine.  Plaintiffs move to exclude references to 
Mr. Pollara having committed bad acts or having arrests or convictions over ten years old.   They 
also move to exclude any testimony from several witnesses who were not disclosed in 
Defendants’ Rule 26 disclosures, or otherwise in discovery. 
I have reviewed the parties’ submissions.  With regard to the six witnesses, two of the 
witnesses have been withdrawn, and I accept Defendants’ representation that the others are 
offered solely for impeachment purposes only, were listed by Plaintiffs’ disclosures, or were 
otherwise known to Plaintiffs.  There is no suggestion of extenuating circumstances, such as bad 
faith or severe prejudice.   Accordingly, the witnesses need not be excluded under applicable 
procedural standards.    
With respect to the “bad acts” evidence, Defendants assume that Plaintiffs refer to 
Defendant Cheng’s receipt of counsel’s advice that she “be careful” of Mr. Pollara, as he had 
“some pending litigations.”  Defendants suggest that they intend to offer no other “bad act” 
Case: 1:09-cv-00060-DWA   Document #: 352   Filed: 05/10/13   Page 1 of 2
evidence, and Plaintiffs likewise point to no specific evidence of this kind.  Thus, I proceed 
under the same assumption as Defendants, and assume that there are no other convictions, 
arrests, or uncharged bad acts that Defendants intend to offer into evidence.    Accordingly, I 
agree that this evidence does not require exclusion under Fed. R. Evid. 404 or 403, for the 
reasons stated in Defendants’ brief.   At the appropriate time, if Plaintiffs so request, I will 
consider a limiting instruction to the jury. 
AND NOW, this 10th day of May, 2013, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and 
DECREED that plaintiff’s Motion in Limine [docket no. 345-1] is hereby DENIED. 
 
 
 
BY THE COURT: 
 
 
 
_/s/Donetta W. Ambrose 
 
 
 
Donetta W. Ambrose 
 
 
 
Senior Judge, U.S. District Court 
 
Case: 1:09-cv-00060-DWA   Document #: 352   Filed: 05/10/13   Page 2 of 2