Harry Irving, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Los Angeles Unified School District, Defendant-appellee, 69 F.3d 544 (9th Cir. 1995)

Before: HUG and LEAVY, Circuit Judges, and Muecke,^**  District Judge.

MEMORANDUM^***/

Harry Irving, a school teacher, appeals a judgment in favor of the Los Angeles Unified School District following a jury trial, in Irving's action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2 et seq., alleging that he was denied a promotion to the position of assistant principal on the basis of race. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Irving alleges that the district court abused its discretion regarding a variety of trial errors. Having reviewed each of Irving's contentions, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion. A trial court has wide discretion in determining what evidence should be admitted or rejected. See United States v. Gutierrez, 995 F.2d 169, 172 (9th Cir. 1993). The court did not err in failing to admit the 1990 census data evidence or in admitting or failing to admit the other pieces of evidence challenged by Irving. Similarly, a district court's formulation of jury instructions is reviewed for abuse of discretion. See United States v. Woodley, 9 F.3d 774, 780 (9th Cir. 1993). We conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion. Finally, the district court's decision to not submit a special verdict was not error. "As a general rule, the court has complete discretion over whether to have the jury return a special verdict or a general verdict." Floyd v. Laws, 929 F.2d 1390, 1395 (9th Cir. 1991).

We have considered Irving's remaining contentions, and we find that they are wholly without merit.

AFFIRMED.