Barber

MEMORANDUM **

Defendants-Appellants County of Ven-tura (the “County”) and Kathy Jenks (collectively, “Defendants”) appeal from a judgment following a jury verdict for Plaintiff-Appellee James Barber and from the district court’s order denying their motion for a new trial and motion for judgment as a matter of law. Defendants contend that: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s special verdict that Barber was subjected to a hostile working environment; (2) the district court admitted irrelevant and prejudicial testimony; (3) the special verdict in favor of Defendants on Plaintiffs § 1981 claim and against them on the § 1983 and Title VII claims were fatally inconsistent; (4) the district court erred in failing to hold a hearing on juror misconduct; and (5) a jury instruction erroneously allowed the jury to award excessive loss of earnings. We affirm.

1. Sufficiency of the Evidence

Because substantial evidence supports the jury’s verdict on both the § 1983 claim against Jenks and the Title VII claim against the County, we affirm the district court’s denial of Defendants’ motions for a new trial and for judgment as a matter of law. See Leatherman Tool Group, Inc.…