Bonomi

MEMORANDUM *

Richard Bonomi (“Bonomi”), a state parole officer, appeals the dismissal of his section 1983 First Amendment retaliation claim following a jury verdict in favor of the defendant. We affirm.

Bonomi alleges that the district court prejudiced the jury by giving advisory instructions and an advisory verdict form as to the purpose of Bonomi’s speech; by allowing Marsha Gaddini’s (“Gaddini”) counsel to cross examine Bonomi as to why Bonomi wanted Gaddini to pay damages; and by failing to give a curative jury instruction on Gaddini’s ability to pay.

At the close of trial, the district court held that Bonomi’s speech regarding inadequate supervision of record keeping and excessive or fraudulent overtime in the parole division of the California Department of Corrections addressed matters of public concern and constituted First Amendment protected speech. The district court nonetheless asked for an advisory jury verdict on whether Bonomi’s point in speaking was to raise a matter of public concern or to pursue a private grievance.

Although we question the district court’s authority to ask for an advisory jury verdict on a question of law in an action triable by right to a…