Marlenis Smart v. City of Miami Beach, Florida

13-11452Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit28 de mai. de 2014

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 13-11452
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:10-cv-21667-MGC
MARLENIS SMART,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA,
a political subdivision,
Defendant-Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
_________________________
(May 28, 2014)
Before MARCUS and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges, and TREADWELL,* District
Judge.
___________________
* Honorable Marc T. Treadwell, United States District Judge for the Middle District of Georgia,
sitting by designation.
Case: 13-11452 Date Filed: 05/28/2014 Page: 1 of 2

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
We have heard oral argument, and have carefully reviewed the briefs and
relevant parts of the record. We conclude that the judgment of the district court
granting the City’s motion for judgment as a matter of law should be affirmed. For
the reasons articulated by the district court in Part A.1 and 2 of its Omnibus Order
Regarding Defendant’s Post-Trial Motions (Docket 218 at pages 7-16),
supplemented by the reasons fully discussed at oral argument,1 we conclude that
the evidence at trial was not sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the terms and
conditions of plaintiff’s employment.
Accordingly, the judgment for the City, entered by the district court
notwithstanding the verdict, is
AFFIRMED.2
1 For example, at oral argument, it was noted that the district court may have erred
in suggesting that the number of gender-based remarks were only three or four. Nevertheless,
there were very few, and fewer still that were egregious (e.g., the single “bimbo” and the two
“cunt” remarks which we note gave rise to a prompt reprimand.) We agree with the district court
that the incidents were far short of severe or pervasive.
2 Our disposition makes it unnecessary to rule upon the other issues raised in the
briefs of the parties.
Case: 13-11452 Date Filed: 05/28/2014 Page: 2 of 2

-- 2 of 2 --

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.