LAMPRON v. POSTMASTER GENERAL et al - Document 107
Court Description:
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL - denying 104 Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law ; denying 104 Motion for New Trial. By JUDGE D. BROCK HORNBY. (mnw)
Loading PDF...
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
LINDA L. LAMPRON,
PLAINTIFF
v.
POSTMASTER GENERAL,
DEFENDANT
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CIVIL NO. 09-477-P-H
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW
OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL
The plaintiff’s motion for judgment as a matter of law or, in the
alternative, motion for a new trial is DENIED.
The motion for judgment as a matter of law under Fed. R. Civ. P. 50 is
DENIED as untimely, because it was not made before the close of all the
evidence. Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(a). Zachar v. Lee, 363 F.3d 70, 74 (1st Cir. 2004).
The motion for a new trial under Rule 59 is DENIED because the jury was
entitled to conclude that adverse employment action was not taken for a
retaliatory reason. The evidence was well and thoroughly presented by both
parties, and the jury resolved their conflicting views as to what inferences to
draw. There is no reason to upset that verdict.
SO ORDERED.
DATED THIS 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2011
/s/D. Brock Hornby
D. BROCK HORNBY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
