Diffey

Diffey v. Riverside County Sheriff's Department

Bad Law
101 Cal. Rptr. 2d 353·2000 Cal. App. LEXIS 868·2000 Daily Journal DAR 12095·84 Cal. App. 4th 1031·2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9132
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 14, 2000E024523California2,903 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gaut, J.

1. Introduction

The Riverside County Sheriff’s Department (County) would not hire Teg Diffey as a deputy sheriff because he is color-blind. The more accurate diagnostic term for Diffey’s condition is “deficient color vision” or “color-deficient.”

Diffey sued defendants—the County, and a nurse, Rebecca Perkins— under FEHA (the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.) and the ADA (the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101-12213 ) for discrimination and retaliation. After Diffey’s offer of proof, the court granted a directed verdict against Diffey on his retaliation claim. Diffey then won a jury verdict of $307,244 on his discrimination claims. After trial, the court granted defendants’ motion for new trial on Diffey’s discrimination claims on the grounds that the jury had rendered an inconsistent verdict and for instructional error.

Diffey appeals from the trial court’s orders granting defendants’ motions for the directed verdict and new trial. Defendants cross-appeal from the trial court’s order denying their motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV).

We hold there is not substantial evidence to support the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.