Alice Robin v. City of Monrovia

Good Law
520 F. App'x 496
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 21, 201311-55131California939 words

Opinion

Opinion

Appellant Alice Robin is a former employee of the City of Monrovia. She sued the City for allegedly retaliating against her, in violation of Title VII, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, after she filed complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity’Commission. At trial, the jury was instructed to consider whether four separate actions by the City — including the offer of a retirement package known as the “Golden Handshake” — were retaliatory acts. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the City and the court entered judgment accordingly. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

1. Robin argues that the district court erred by denying her several motions for judgment as a matter of law. We find no error. First, a denial of a motion for summary judgment is not subject to appellate review after a trial on the merits. Locricchio v. Legal Sens. Corp., 838 F.2d 1352 ,1359 (9th Cir.1987). Second, the district court did not err in denying Robin’s motion for a directed verdict, motion for judgment as a matter of law, and renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law. Such motions may only be granted when…

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.