Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-03-40972/USCOURTS-ca5-03-40972-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Christus Health Ark-La-Tex
Appellee
Gwender M Stiger
Appellant

Document Text:

*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstancesset forth in 5THCIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 3, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT

_________________

No. 03-40972

(Summary Calendar)

_________________

GWENDER M STIGER,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CHRISTUS HEALTH ARK-LA-TEX, Corporation Service Company,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Eastern District of Texas

USDC: 5:01-CV-68

Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appellant, Gwender Stiger, filed suit under Title VII of the 1964 CivilRights Act, 42 U.S.C.

§ 2000e etseq., alleging that Appellee,ChristusHealth(“Christus”), intentionallydiscriminated based

 Case: 03-40972 Document: 0051490302 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/03/2004
-2-

on race in failing to promote and wrongfully terminated by way of constructive discharge. After

hearing testimony and weighing the evidence, a jury concluded that Stiger was not constructively

discharged and that race was not a motivating factor inChristus’s employment decisions. Stiger filed

a motion for new trial, FED. R. CIV. P. 59, which the district court denied. Stiger now appeals. 

On appeal, Stiger argues that the district court should have ordered a new trial because there

wassufficient evidence of constructive discharge. “Absent a clear showing of an abuse of discretion,

we will not reverse the trial court’s decision to deny a new trial.” Hidden Oaks Ltd. v. City of Austin,

138 F.3d 1036, 1049 (5th Cir. 1998) (quotation omitted). Stiger must demonstrate “an absolute

absence of evidence to support the jury’s verdict, thus indicating that the trial court had abused its

discretion in refusing to find the jury’s verdict contrary to the great weight of the evidence.” Id.

(quotations omitted). There was more than sufficient evidence to support the jury’s verdict. The trial

court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to order a new trial. 

Stiger further contends that she received ineffective assistance of counsel. However, there

is no right to effective assistance of counsel in civil proceedings. See Sanchez v. United States Postal

Serv., 785 F.2d 1236, 1237 (5th Cir. 1986) (per curiam). Stiger also asserts that the trial court erred

in its jury instructions. Because Stiger did not object to the jury instructions at trial, we review the

jury instructions for plain error. Nero v. Industrial Molding Corp., 167 F.3d 921, 932 (5th Cir.

1999). The trial court’s instructions on constructive discharge are consistent with our precedent.

See Hunt v. Rapides Healthcare Sys., 277 F.3d 757, 771 (5th Cir. 2001) (“A constructive discharge

occurs when the employermakesworking conditionsso intolerable that a reasonable employee would

feel compelled to resign.”). Thus, Stiger has not established error, much less plain error. Finally,

Stiger arguesthat defense counselcommitted intentionalfraud. Stiger has not presented any evidence

 Case: 03-40972 Document: 0051490302 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/03/2004
-3-

of intentional fraud aside from her conclusory allegations. She has identified no error which merits

reversal. See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5thCir. 1987).

AFFIRMED. 

 Case: 03-40972 Document: 0051490302 Page: 3 Date Filed: 03/03/2004