Zottola

Zottola v. City of Oakland

Good Law
32 F. App'x 307
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 4, 2002No. 01-15238; D.C. No. CV-97-04664-MMC/JCSCalifornia2,688 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*309 MEMORANDUM **

Don Zottola, a white male, alleges on appeal that the oral interview component of the City of Oakland’s (“Oakland”) entry level examination for the position of a firefighter discriminates against white males in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e. Specifically, Zottola contends that the district judge erred when she: (1) dismissed his disparate treatment claim as a matter of law; (2) denied his motion to grant judgment as a matter of law in his favor on the disparate impact claim; (3) improperly instructed the first jury about the meaning of “business” “necessity” and “job relatedness”; (4) granted a new trial on alternative measures only rather than permitting a new trial on the entire disparate impact claim; and (5) excluded evidence of possible alternatives at the second trial. We affirm on all grounds.

A. Disparate Treatment

Zottola argues that he presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case of intentional discrimination and that, as a result, the district court erred when, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50 (“FRCP 50”), it dismissed his disparate treatment claim as a matter of law following 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.