Barry Lamon v. D. Lytle

MEMORANDUM

Barry Louis Lamon appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his motion for a new trial and from various other rulings in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging First and Eighth Amendment claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for an abuse of discretion the denial of a motion for a new trial, Desrosiers v. Flight Int’l of Fla., Inc., 156 F.3d 952 , 957 (9th Cir.1998), and may affirm on any grounds supported by the record, Johnson v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., 534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir.2008). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a new trial based on defendants’ alleged destruction of evidence because Lamon failed to establish that there was an absolute absence of evidence to support the jury’s verdict as to his deliberate indifference to medical needs claim. See Desrosiers, 156 F.3d at 957.

The district court properly instructed the jury that prison officials were entitled to deference in how they accomplished La-mon’s cell transfer because such an instruction is required for all conditions of confinement claims. See Norwood v. Vance, 591 F.3d 1062, 1067 (9th Cir.2010) (error to reject deference…