Broderick v. Evans, No. 08-1692

By FindLaw Staff on June 29, 2009 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

In an employment termination action, district court judgment is affirmed where: 1) the evidence was sufficient for a jury to conclude that protected conduct played enough of a role in plaintiff's discharge to support the verdict that defendant was substantially motivated by an aim to retaliate; 2) the court did not abuse its discretion in failing to grant remittitur as substantial evidence allowed the jury to conclude that plaintiff likely could not have found a job earning substantial income; and 3) the court did not err in refusing to submit the question of punitive damages to the jury as there was no direct evidence that defendant acted in whole or in part to retaliate for the law suit. 

Read Broderick v. Evans, No. 08-1692

Appellate Information
APPEAL from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts.  
Decided: June 26, 2009

Before Boudin, Tashima, and Howard, Circuit Judges.
Opinion by Boudin, Circuit Judge .

For Plaintiff: Michael W. Reilly
For Defendant: Michael W. Reilly

Copied to clipboard