T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he H onor abl e L oui s H . P ol l a k, S e ni orU ni t e d S t a t e s D i s tr i c tJudge ** f orthe E a s t e rn D i s tr i c tof P e nns y l vani a , s i tt i ng byde s i gna t i on. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T L A R R Y D . R U S S E L L , D . D . S . a nd P A U L E T T E R U S S E L L , hus ba nd and w i fe , P l ai n t i ffs - A p p el l an t s, v. M OU NTAI N PARK H EALT H CENTE R P R O P E R T IE S , L L C , an A ri zona l i m i t ed l i abi l i ty c orpo rat i on do i ng bu si ness as M o u n ta in P a rkH e a lth C e n te r ; e t a l., D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 08- 16798 D. C . No . 2 : 0 7 - c v - 0 0 8 7 5 - NV W ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

A r i z ona N e i l V . W a ke , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d O c t obe r6, 2010 S a n F r an c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B e f or e : R E I N H A R D T a nd B E R Z O N , C i r c ui tJudge s , a nd P O L L A K , S e ni or D i stri ctJudg e. ** 

# FI LED NO V 08 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSW hi l e R us s e l l ’ s de c l a r a t i on c ont a i ne d no s t a t e m e nt s r e l a t i ng t o a ge 1 di s c r i m i na t i on, M ount a i n P a rk’ s s t a t e m e ntof f a c t s s upport i ng s um m aryj udgm e nt ci t ed t o v ar i ou s port i on s of Russe l l ’ s deposi t i on t es t i m on y w here he al l eged d is c r im in a to rytr e a tm e n t b a s e do n a g e . M o r e o v e r , th e d is tr ic t c o u rt e x p r e s s ly ac kn ow l edged R usse l l ’ s t es t i m on y thatD r. B aderhad com m ent ed thatR usse l l w as s i m i l a ri n a ge t o he rf

a the r . C ons e que nt l y , w e do nottr e a tthi s e vi de nc e a s ha vi ng b e e n e x c lu d e du n d e rL o c a l R u le 5 6 .1 ( b ) .2 L a rryD . R us s e l l appe a l s the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s gr antof s um m aryj udgm e nt d is m is s in g h is c la im s a g a in s t M o u n ta in P arkH e a lth C e n te r . W e a f f irm in p art, r e ve r s e i n pa rt , a nd r e m a nd. It w as n o t an ab u se o f d iscr etio n fo r th e d istrict co u rt to h o ldth at R u ss ell’ s bri ef i n res po nse t o M ou nt ai n P ark’ s m ot i on for s um m ary j ud gm entdi d n otm ee t th e r e q u ir e m e n ts o f

L o c a l R u le o f

C iv il P r o c e du r e 5 6 .1 ( b ) . R u ssel l n o n eth el ess p resen t edev i d en ce o f h o st i l e co m m en t s d i rect edag ai n st hi m on the ba s i s of

both hi s r a c e a nd a ge , a nd a l s o r a i s e d s i gni f i c antque s t i ons re gardi ng the l egi t i m ac y of the no n-di sc ri m i nat ory r ea sons thatM ou nt ai n P ark p r o f f e r e df o rh is f ir in g . S u c h as h o w in g is s u f f ic ie n t to r a is e aju ryq u e s tio n a s to 1 w hether M ou nt ai n P ark’ s non -di sc ri m i nat ory r ea sons for Russe l l ’ s f i ri ng w er e p r e te x tu a l. T h e r e is a ls o ag e n u in e is s u e o f f a c t a s to w h e th e rth e in d iv idu a ls r e s pons i bl e f

orR us s e l l ’ s t e rm i na t i on w e r e a c tua l l yr e s pons i bl e f orhi s hi r i ng, r a the rtha n s i m pl ypa rt i c i pa nt s i n tha tpr oc e s s , a nd thus M ount a i n V i e w i s not e nt i t l e d f orpurpos e s of

s um m a ryj udgm e ntt o the “ s a m e - a c t or ” i nf e r e nc e of non-3

d is c r im in a tio n . Se e C oghlan v . A m . Se af oods C o. , 41 3 F . 3d 10 90 , 10 96 (9th C i r. 2 0 0 5 ). T h e d istrict co u rt th u s e rr ed ing ra n ti n g su m m ary ju d g m en t o n R u ss ell’ s w r o n g f u l te rm in a tio n c la im s u n d e rT itle V I I , th e A D E A , an d4 2 U .S .C . § 1 9 8 1 . Se e A nthoi ne v . N

. C e ntral C ount i es C ons or t i um , 60 5 F . 3d 74 0, 75 3 (9th C i r. 2 0 1 0 ) ; se e general l

y M cD on nel l D ou glas C orp. v. G re en , 41 1 U . S . 79 2 (19 73 ). R us s e l l a l l e ge s tha tM ount a i n P ark vi ol a t e d the F a m i l ya nd M e di c a l L e a ve A ct(F M L A ). M ou nt ai n P ark st at ed thaton e r ea son for R usse l l ’ s f i ri ng w as an i nd ependentexpert ’ s det erm i nat i on , base d o n a re vi ew of 12 pat i entchart s s el ec t ed b yM o u n ta in P a rk , th a t R u s s e ll p r o v id e ds ub - s tan d ar dc ar e to h is p a tie n ts . R u s s e ll al l eges thatal l 12 of tho se chart s bel on ged t o p at i ent s w ho se care R usse l l w as unabl e t o c om pl e t e due t o hi s us e of m e di c a l l e a ve pr ot e c t e d bythe F M L A . T he F M L A i m pl em ent i ng re gu l at i on s prohi bi tan em pl oyerfr om i nt er fe ri ng w i th an em p l o yee’ s ri g h t s u n d er th e A ctb y “ u s[i n g ] th e t ak i n g o f F M L A l eav e as a negat i ve fa ct or i n em pl oym entac t i on s. ” 29 C . F . R . § 8 25 . 22 0(c) . R usse l l al l eges p r e c is e lys u c h in te r f

e r e n c e . T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt th e r e f o r e e rr e din d is m is s in g h is F M L A cl ai m s. R u s s e ll h a s n o t p r o v id e ds u f f ic ie n t e v id e n c e to r a is e aju ryq u e s tio n a s to hara ss m entun der the A D E A , T i t l e V II , or § 1 98 1. T he evi dence Russe l l prov i ded doe s note s t abl i s h c onduc t“ s uf f i c i e nt l ys e ve r e orpe rva s i ve t o a l t e rthe c ondi t i onsR u s s e ll d o e s n o t ap p e a l th e g r an t o f s u m m aryju d g m e n t a g a in s t h is s ta te 2 l aw cl ai m s. 4 of the vi ct i m ' s e m pl oym entand creat e an abu si ve w orki ng envi ronm ent . ” H arris v . Forkl i f t Sys. , Inc. , 510 U . S . 17, 21 ( 1993) ( i nt e rna l quot a t i on m arks a nd c i t a t i ons om i tt ed). 2 T he doc tr i ne of

a f t e r - a c qui r e d e vi de nc e doe s notpr e c l ude the pos s i bi l i tyof R u s s e ll r e c o v e r in g d a m a g e s . C f . McKe nnon v . N

as hv i l le B anne rP ubl ’

g C o. , 513 U . S . 35 2, 36 2 (19 95 ) ( “ A n absol ut e rul e barri ng any r ec ov ery of bac kp ay[bas ed upon a f t e r - a c qui r e d e vi de nc e ] w oul d unde rm i ne the A D E A ' s obj e c t i ve of f or c i ng e m pl oy e r s t o c ons i de ra nd e xa m i ne the i rm ot i va t i ons , a nd of pe na l i z i ng the m f

or em pl oym entdeci si on s thatspri ng fr om age di sc ri m i nat i on . ”) . W hi l e the di stri ct c ourtc a n t a ke e qui t abl e c ons i de r a t i ons i nt o a c c ounti n c r a f t i ng r e m e di e s f

or vi ol at i on s of T i t l e V II and the A D E A , i f M ou nt ai n P ark succe eds i n p rovi ng that th e a f te r - a c q u ir e de v id e n c e d o c tr in e ap p lie s , s u c h as h o w in g w o u ld , a t m o s t, lim it R u s s e ll’s d a m a g e s a w a r dto “b a c kp ayf r o m th e d a te o f

th e u n law f

u l d is c h ar g e to the dat e the new i nform at i on w as di sc ov er ed. ” I d. AF F I RME D I N P AR T , RE V E RS E D I N P AR T , a nd R EM A N D ED .