Unpublished Dispositionbill Galanis, Appellant, v. Blackie's House of Beef, Inc, 851 F.2d 1500 (D.C. Cir. 1988)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit - 851 F.2d 1500 (D.C. Cir. 1988) April 19, 1988

Before EDWARDS and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and LOUIS F. OBERDORFER, District Judge* .

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.


This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and was briefed and argued by counsel for the parties. The court is satisfied, after reviewing the issues posed in light of the record, that disposition of the appeal does not warrant a published opinion. See D.C. Cir. Rule 14(c). After reviewing the record and considering the parties' arguments, we hold that the district court erred in directing a verdict for appellee Blackie's House of Beef on Galanis's discrimination claim. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the appellant, we find that appellant Galanis presented sufficient evidence of discrimination on grounds of national origin to avoid a directed verdict. Moreover, appellee's contention that Galanis resigned voluntarily is not only disputed, but is probably meritless. It was stipulated by all parties (and appellant introduced evidence consistent with that stipulation) that Blackie's fired Galanis in May 1985. For these reasons, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED by this court that the order of the district court granting appellee's motion for a directed verdict is reversed. It is

FURTHER ORDERED by this court, sua sponte, that the clerk withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. See D.C. Cir. R. 15 (August 1, 1987). This instruction to the clerk is without prejudice to the right of any party at any time to move for expedited issuance of the mandate for good cause shown.

 *

Sitting by designation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 292(a)

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.