As plaintiff did not present claim that deft and corporate deft were linked and declined to assert strict liability of one for the other during deliberations, no error in jury finding liability for one and not the other.
Explicit provision for nominal damages did not impermissibly suggest that non-monetary damages were appropriate.
Racial epithet and disparate treatment suffices to present an issue for trial on hostile work environment.
Statement of opposing party wasn't barred as hearsay.
Triable question of retaliation given facts.
Concerted attempts to end the plaintiff's career were sufficient for the verdict.
Court did not abuse its discretion in comparing the discussion of amounts of award in plaintiff's closing with actual award in declining to award fees.
http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2018/D07-02/C:16-3390:J:Rovner:aut:T:fnOp:N:2180150:S:0
Since 2011. An occasional commonplacing of the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal.
Neither an authoritative statement of the law nor legal advice. Quick work.