Gibson

MEMORANDUM **

John Gibson appeals the district court’s award of judgment as a matter of law in favor of King County with respect to his discriminatory failure-to-promote and hostile work environment claims. He also challenges three of the district court’s evidentiary rulings. We reverse with respect to the failure-to-promote claim and affirm with respect to the hostile work environment claim. We also conclude that the district court erred with respect to the basis of its decision to exclude Gibson’s evidence regarding Dawson’s report; however, we cannot determine on the record before us whether that evidence was relevant. On remand, the district court is instructed to determine its relevancy. As to Gibson’s remaining two evidentiary challenges, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion.

I.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to Gibson, there was sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to conclude that race was at least a motivating factor 1 *41 in the County’s decision not to promote him. Where a “person who exhibited discriminatory animus influenced or participated in the decisionmaking process, a reasonable factfinder could conclude that…