Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-02685/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-02685-9/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Kelly Services
Defendant
Lynn Noyes
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

 Jury Instruction No. 14 was originally proposed by Plaintiff 1

on March 4, 2008, as “General Instruction No. 7.”

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LYNN NOYES, )

) 2:02-cv-2685-GEB-CMK

Plaintiff, )

) ORDER RE PROPOSED JURY 

) INSTRUCTION NO. 14

v. ) 

)

KELLY SERVICES, INC., )

 )

Defendant. )

)

The parties are directed to meet and confer on the

portion of Jury Instruction No. 14 that reads: 1

If, however, the Defendant proves by a preponderance of

the evidence that the Defendant would have made the same

decision even if the Plaintiff’s religion or lack of

religion had played no role in the employment decision,

your verdict should be for the Defendant. (Emphasis

added.)

Case 2:02-cv-02685-GEB-CMK Document 177 Filed 03/31/08 Page 1 of 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

The verdict form discussed on March 27, 2008 is attached. 2

This portion of Jury Instruction No. 14 is based on the Ninth 3

Circuit Model Jury Instruction 10.1C, which suggests that the “same

decision” defense language be deleted if defendant does not assert

this affirmative defense.

No verdict question relates to this portion of Jury Instruction No.

14. It appears that this portion of Jury Instruction No. 14 2

should be deleted unless defendant is asserting the “same decision”

affirmative defense. The parties shall address this issue in a 3

filing due no later than noon on April 1, 2008.

Dated: March 31, 2008

 

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:02-cv-02685-GEB-CMK Document 177 Filed 03/31/08 Page 2 of 2