Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_12-cv-00844/USCOURTS-azd-4_12-cv-00844-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 29:621 Job Discrimination (Age)

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Gary S. Duarte, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Catalina Foothills School District No. 16, 

Defendant.

No. CV-12-00844-TUC-JAS

ORDER 

 A review of the record reflects that part of the Court’s Order (Doc. 71) pertaining 

to the Disputed Jury Instruction has language that is missing after “See Doc. 60-1 at p. 1” 

which appears at p. 4 (between lines 15 and 16). The Court is uncertain why this 

language is missing as the Court’s Word version has the language at issue; in any event, 

it appears that there was some technical issue in uploading the document for filing. The 

Court has included the full language that should have originally appeared in Doc. 71 as to 

the disputed final jury instruction below. 

Disputed Jury Instruction 

 The record reflects that there is only one disputed jury instruction which is a final 

jury instruction as to business judgment submitted by Defendant which states: 

As you deliberate you must remember that the role of the jury is not to 

second guess the District’s business or management decisions. You must 

not substitute your own judgment about whether any particular business or 

management decisions were wise, or even fair. You may not return a 

Case 4:12-cv-00844-JAS Document 72 Filed 10/08/14 Page 1 of 2
- 2 - 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

verdict for Mr. Duarte just because you might disagree with a business or 

management decision by the District, or because you might believe that it 

was harsh, unreasonable, or unfair. 

Employers are entitled to make their own subjective business or 

management judgments and to set any standards for employment they want, 

regardless of how those standards may appear to the jury, and to decide to 

discharge an employee for any reason that is not discriminatory. 

Employers have the right to make good or bad, wise or unwise, and fair or 

unfair business or management decisions. Your role as the jury simply is to 

determine whether Mr. Duarte has proven the specific elements of his legal 

claim as I have described those elements to you in these instructions. 

See Doc. 60-1 at p. 1. While a business judgment instruction is appropriate inasmuch as 

it accurately states the law in the Ninth Circuit and emphasizes that the jury should find 

for Plaintiff only if the elements (as described by the Court) are proven, the Court finds 

that the proposed instruction is verbose and would be confusing for the jury. As such, 

after the Court reads the elements of Plaintiff’s claims (i.e., Stipulated Final Instruction 

No. 4-Doc. 59-1 at p. 4) the Court will read the following business judgment instruction: 

An employer has the right to make subjective personnel decisions for any 

reason that is not discriminatory. You may not return a verdict for Plaintiff 

just because you might disagree with the Defendant’s decision or believe it 

to be harsh or unreasonable. Your role as the jury is to determine whether 

Plaintiff has proven the specific elements of his legal claim as I have 

described those elements to you in these instructions. 

 Dated this 8th day of October, 2014. 

Honorable James A. Soto 

United States District Judge 

Case 4:12-cv-00844-JAS Document 72 Filed 10/08/14 Page 2 of 2