Judith Lucke v. Multnomah County

MEMORANDUM

Judith Lucke appeals the district court’s judgment in her action against Multnomah County and various employees of Multno-mah County. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by excluding certain comparator evidence. Multnomah County did not stipulate that other county employees who allegedly received less discipline for similar misconduct had not used FMLA leave. Similarly, Multnomah County did not stipulate that other county employees who allegedly received less discipline for similar misconduct had not requested an ADA accommodation. Nor did Lucke provide such evidence at trial. See Tritchler v. County of Lake, 358 F.3d 1150, 1155 (9th Cir.2004). The district court did not adopt a per se evidentiary rule by limiting comparator evidence to other correctional employees because the court based its ruling on the unique factual circumstances at issue, namely, that Lucke, unlike the other employees, was a corrections employee who was not involved in law enforcement or management. See Vasquez v. County of Los Angeles, 349 F.3d 634, 641 (9th Cir. 2003).

The district court did not err when it…