Lytle

Lytle v. Carl

Bad Law
382 F.3d 978·59 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 601
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 1, 2004Nos. 02-16244, 03-15126, 03-15181California5,237 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Fletcher, J.

Defendant-Appellant Clark County School District (“the District”) appeals a judgment entered on a jury verdict in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by plaintiff-appellee Trudi Lytle, a kindergarten teacher in the District. Lytle contended at trial that the District violated her constitutional rights by retaliating against her because of an earlier action she had brought, and won, against the District. The district court denied the District’s post-trial motion for a judgment as a matter of law. The district court first held that municipal liability could be imposed on the District under § 1983 based on the actions of Superintendent Dr. Brian Cram and Assistant Superintendent Dr. Edward Goldman, whom it concluded were “final policymakers.” Second, the district court concluded that there was sufficient evidence to support a jury conclusion that Goldman engaged in retaliation and ratified retaliatory acts by other District employees. We affirm the denial of the District’s motion for a judgment as a matter of law.

The District also appeals the district court’s award of attorneys’ fees. Lytle cross-appeals the district court’s award of *981 attorneys’ fees and refusal to award…

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.