Terry Goddard v. Dhl Express (Usa), Inc.

Good Law
357 F. App'x 80
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 23, 200908-16919California755 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Defendant-appellant DHL Express (USA), Inc. (“DHL”) appeals the judgment of the district court denying its motion for judgment as a matter of law, or alternatively for a new trial, on the ground that the district court should have ordered a new trial because the jury’s compensatory damages award of $850,000 stemming from a verdict in favor of plaintiff-appellant Jill Shumway on her Title VII retaliation claim was excessive. DHL argues that: (1) the jury improperly awarded Shumway compensatory damages based on pecuniary loss for a time period subsequent to her voluntary resignation; and (2) the portion of the award representing emotional distress damages is excessive. We affirm.

We review a district court’s ruling on a motion for a new trial pursuant to Rule 59(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for an abuse of discretion. McEuin v. Crown Equip. Corp., 328 F.3d 1028, 1032 (9th Cir.2003). The district court’s judgment with respect to whether a jury verdict is excessive and warrants either remittitur or a new trial is reviewed for clear abuse of discretion, affording substantial deference to the jury’s findings of the appropriate amount of damages. Gas-perini v.…

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.