Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Pacific Maritime Ass'n

Good Law
351 F.3d 1270
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 24, 2003No. 02-35536California2,350 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Aldisert, J.

Pacific Maritime Association (PMA) appeals the district court’s denial of a renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law following a jury verdict and judgment in favor of a longshore worker claiming sexual harassment. The district court entered the judgment in favor of intervenor Teresa Jones in an action brought on her behalf by the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) against PMA, Marine Terminals *1272 Corporation (MTC) and the International Longshore Workers Union Local 8.

In its brief, PMA raises seven discrete issues. Because we conclude that PMA was not the employer of Jones for purposes of the sexual harassment claims brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., we need not address the other issues raised by PMA. 1 Indeed, in light of the presentations at oral argument, our task here appears to track the.narrow compass of deciding only whether PMA was a joint employer with MTC for purposes of Title VII. We are persuaded that our decision in Anderson v. Pacific Maritime Association, 336 F.3d 924 (9th Cir.2003), filed after the district court made its rulings in this case, controls the outcome of this appeal.…

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.