Trial Court Incorrectly Interpreted Law Of Retaliation
Cynthia DeCaire, a Deputy U.S. Marshal, brought suit alleging that Anthony Dichio, then the U.S. Marshal for the District of Massachusetts, discriminated against her on the basis of gender and retaliated against her after she filed complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity office. After a bench trial, the district court ruled against DeCaire on both claims.
The district court held that Dichio did discriminate against DeCaire, that she was treated adversely after she complained, and that the government's explanations of neutral reasons were not persuasive. Nonetheless, the court found Dichio's hostility was motivated by his perception that DeCaire was disloyal to him personally, and not by gender animus or retaliation. The defense had never posed any such theory of motivation or so interpreted the facts on either claim. Dichio himself testified to no such motivation, nor did any witness.
DeCaire appealed. In light of errors in the application of law and the lack of record support for the district court's factual conclusions, the 1st Circuit vacated the verdict and remanded for a new trial.
DeCaire v. Mukasey
The 1st Circuit Court of Appeals’ jurisdiction includes Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Puerto Rico and Rhode Island.