Branko Sindicich v. "M Highway"

47 F.3d 1176 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Branko SINDICICH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. "M HIGHWAY" Defendant-Appellee. No. 93-56323. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Feb. 6, 1995. Feb. 21, 1995. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California; No. 90-01032-JSL, J. Spencer Letts, District Judge, Presiding. C.D.Cal. REVERSED AND REMANDED. Before: TROTT, FERNANDEZ, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Branko Sindicich appeals the district court's order granting Marble Highway's motion for judgment as a matter of law. We reverse and remand to the district court. DISCUSSION 3 A post-trial motion for judgment as a matter of law can be granted only on grounds advanced in a preverdict motion. See Murphy v. City of Long Beach, 914 F.2d 183, 186 (9th Cir.1990); Fed.R.Civ.P. 50 advisory committee's note (1991). Review of Marble Highway's preverdict motion shows that it attacked the…