Unpublished Disposition, 908 F.2d 978 (9th Cir. 1990)

MEMORANDUM^*** 

The Bank of Guam ("Bank") appeals the Appellate Division's affirmance of a jury verdict in favor of Maria Vaughn ("Vaughn"). Upon review we affirm on the Appellate Division's statement of the facts and analysis.

The Bank contends that substantial evidence does not support the jury's special verdict that Vaughn does not owe the Bank $25,000.¹  "The standard of review for a jury verdict in a civil case is whether it is supported by substantial evidence, that is, such relevant evidence as reasonable minds might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." Roberts v. College of the Desert, 870 F.2d 1411, 1417 (9th Cir. 1988).

We uphold the jury special verdict. As the Appellate Division makes clear in its careful discussion of the facts, the jury could find for Vaughn on the issue of the $25,000 if it determined Vaughn had not refused to return the money. Substantial evidence supports the jury's conclusion that Vaughn had not renounced her agreement to repay the money. Vaughn never disavowed the note which settled the overpayment dispute. Evidence of that settlement was presented to the jury. Thus, the jury could conclude that, while Vaughn objected to the mortgage, she had not disavowed her obligation to pay back the Bank.

AFFIRMED.