Robin Potera-Haskins v. Geoffrey Gamble , 447 F. App'x 813 ( 2011 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION AUG 16 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ROBIN POTERA-HASKINS, No. 10-35778
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:05-cv-00022-SEH
v.
MEMORANDUM *
GEOFFREY GAMBLE; ALLEN
YARNELL; PETER FIELDS; DAN
DAVIES; BOZEMAN, MSU,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Montana
Sam E. Haddon, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted August 5, 2011
Seattle, Washington
Before: SCHROEDER and NOONAN, Circuit Judges, and SNOW, District
Judge.**
Robin Potera-Haskins (“Potera-Haskins”) appeals the district court’s denial
of a jury trial on her claim under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972,
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The Honorable G. Murray Snow, District Judge for the U.S. District
Court for Arizona, Phoenix, sitting by designation.
20 U.S.C. § 1681, and its grant of summary judgment on her 42 U.S.C. § 1983
First Amendment retaliation claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291
and we affirm.
Potera-Haskins was not entitled to a jury trial on her Title IX claim. With
respect to monetary relief, she could recover no more than the liquidated damages
she received, and a bench trial was therefore appropriate. See Smith v. Barton, 914
F.2d 1330, 1337 (9th Cir. 1990).
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Potera-Haskins’
First Amendment retaliation claim because her statements were made pursuant to
her official duties. See Garcetti v. Ceballos, 547 U.S. 410, 421 (2006).
AFFIRMED.
2