Acevedo Diaz v. Aponte ( 1993 )


Menu:
  • USCA1 Opinion









    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
    ____________________

    No. 92-1846
    FRANCO ACEVEDO-DIAZ, ET AL.,

    Plaintiffs, Appellees,

    v.

    JOSE E. APONTE, ET AL.,

    Defendants, Appellees,

    ________

    ADA N. PEREZ, ET AL.,

    Plaintiffs, Appellants.

    _____________________


    No. 92-1848
    FRANCO ACEVEDO-DIAZ, ET AL.,

    Plaintiffs, Appellees,

    v.

    JOSE E. APONTE, ET AL.,

    Defendants, Appellees,


    ________

    DOROTEA COLLAZO RIVERA, ET AL.,

    Plaintiffs, Appellants.

    _____________________



    APPEALS FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

    FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO,

    [Hon. Raymond L. Acosta, U.S. District Judge]
    ___________________

    ____________________


















    Before

    Selya, Cyr and Stahl,

    Circuit Judges.
    ______________

    ____________________



    Raul Barrera Morales for appellants.
    ____________________
    William Reyes Elias with whom Cesar R. Miranda Law Office
    ___________________ _____________________________
    was on brief for appellees.


    ____________________

    August 3, 1993
    ____________________

































    2
















    CYR, Circuit Judge. In November 1984, Jose E. Aponte,
    CYR, Circuit Judge.
    _____________

    the candidate of the Popular Democratic Party ("PDP"), was

    elected mayor of the Municipality of Carolina ("City"), Puerto

    Rico, defeating the incumbent mayor, Roberto Iglesias, the

    candidate of the New Progressive Party ("NPP"). During his first

    year in office, Mayor Aponte either terminated, or refused to

    renew, several hundred non-policymaking city employees hired

    under the previous administration. In letters of dismissal to

    the employees, Aponte claimed that the City faced a severe fiscal

    crisis, and disclosed various criteria for determining which

    municipal employees were to be terminated in order to effect the

    necessary economies:


    (1) employees hired without compliance with
    Commonwealth or municipal personnel laws
    and regulations, see, e.g., P.R. Laws
    ___ ____
    Ann. tit. 3, 1331-1337, which dictate
    the public posting of available posi-
    tions and competitive examinations;

    (2) employees hired or promoted during the
    1984 "veda," or "electoral prohibition
    period," a four-month "window" before
    and after a municipal election during
    which hiring, renewals, or promotions by
    the incumbent administration are pro-
    scribed by law;

    (3) employees who submitted no documentary
    proof that they possessed the minimum
    education and experience required for
    their positions;

    (4) employees whose job positions were
    deemed nonessential, and therefore ex-
    pendable; or



    3














    (5) employees who had committed employment
    infractions (e.g., unexcused leaves of
    ____
    absence, chronic tardiness).

    In March 1986, 357 terminated employees, claiming poli-

    tical affiliation with the ousted NPP, brought the present civil

    rights action under 42 U.S.C. 1983 against the City, Mayor

    Aponte, Jose A. del Valle (at times, the acting mayor), and Felix

    Martinez (the personnel officer). Plaintiffs alleged that their

    dismissals were due solely to their NPP affiliation, in violation

    of their First Amendment and due process rights under the United

    States Constitution. The complaint demanded compensatory and

    punitive damages, as well as reinstatement.1

    The claims of 255 plaintiffs went to the jury following

    a four-month trial, and defendant verdicts were returned on the

    claims of 240 plaintiffs. Six plaintiffs were awarded compen-

    satory damages (from $1700 to $10,440) against the City, and

    punitive damages ($25,000) against Aponte, while nine plaintiffs



    ____________________

    1Three municipal employee classifications were involved in
    the challenged terminations: (1) "regular" employees, occupying
    permanent or career municipal positions, (2) "transitory"
    employees, appointed without the usual personnel screening
    procedures (e.g., postings and competitive examinations), but
    ____
    subject to periodic renewals at the expiration of their fixed
    terms, and (3) "contractual" workers, hired for fixed terms under
    federally funded programs (e.g., HUD) administered by the City.
    ____
    "Transitory" employees lack tenure, or a reasonable expectation
    in the indefinite continuation of their employment after the
    expiration of their fixed term. While their lack of a property
    interest in their employment positions generally precludes due
    process claims for a politically discriminatory dismissal, First
    Amendment discrimination claims are not precluded. See Santiago-
    ___ _________
    Negron v. Castro-Davila, 865 F.2d 431, 436 (1st Cir. 1989);
    ______ _____________
    Estrada-Izquierdo v. Aponte-Roque, 850 F.2d 10, 16 (1st Cir.
    _________________ ____________
    1988).

    4














    were awarded nominal damages ($1.00) against the City,2 and

    punitive damages ($25,000) against Aponte. The district court

    denied all claims for reinstatement. Finally, in May 1992, the

    court set aside all fifteen plaintiff verdicts. The present

    appeal is brought by eleven of the fifteen disappointed plain-

    tiffs.


    DISCUSSION
    DISCUSSION
    __________

    A. Standard of Review and Applicable Law
    A. Standard of Review and Applicable Law
    _____________________________________


    A jury verdict may not be set aside as a matter of law

    under Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(b) except on a "'determination that the

    evidence could lead a reasonable person to only one conclusion.'"
    ____ ___ __________

    Hiraldo-Cancel v. Aponte, 925 F.2d 10, 12 n.2 (1st Cir.) (quoting
    ______________ ______

    Conway v. Electro Switch Corp., 825 F.2d 593, 598 (1st Cir.
    ______ _____________________

    1987)) (emphasis added), cert. denied, 112 S. Ct. 637 (1991); see
    ____ ______ ___

    Ferrer v. Zayas, 914 F.2d 309, 311 (1st Cir. 1990). On de novo
    ______ _____ __ ____

    review, the court of appeals will uphold the verdict unless the

    facts and inferences, viewed in the light most favorable to the

    verdict, "point so strongly and overwhelmingly in favor of the

    movant that a reasonable jury could not have [returned the ver-

    dict]." Hendricks & Assocs., Inc. v. Daewoo Corp., 923 F.2d 209,
    _________________________ ____________

    214 (1st Cir. 1991); Ferrer, 914 F.2d at 311; Mayo v. Schooner
    ______ ____ ________

    Capital Corp., 825 F.2d 566, 568 (1st Cir. 1987).
    _____________

    ____________________

    2On appeal, certain plaintiffs demand a new trial on compen-
    satory damages, arguing that the jury had no choice but to credit
    their testimony on damages, especially as it related to their
    mental suffering and anguish. We summarily reject their argu-
    ment, as wholly unsupported by the record.

    5














    In a political discrimination case, see Branti v.
    ___ ______

    Finkel, 445 U.S. 507 (1980); Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347 (1976),
    ______ _____ _____

    plaintiffs must bear the threshold burden of producing sufficient

    direct or circumstantial evidence from which a jury reasonably

    may infer that plaintiffs' constitutionally protected conduct

    in this case, political affiliation with the NPP was a "sub-

    stantial" or "motivating" factor behind their dismissal.3 See
    ___

    Ferrer, 914 F.2d at 311; Estrada-Izquierdo v. Aponte-Roque, 850
    ______ _________________ ____________

    F.2d 10, 13 (1st Cir. 1988); Rosaly v. Ignacio, 593 F.2d 145,
    ______ _______

    148-49 (1st Cir. 1979). Once plaintiffs clear the threshold, the

    burden shifts to defendants to articulate a nondiscriminatory
    __________

    ground for the dismissals, and prove by a preponderance of the
    ___ _____ __ _ _____________ __ ___

    evidence that plaintiffs would have been dismissed regardless of
    ________

    their political affiliation. See Givhan v. Western Line Consol.
    ___ ______ ____________________

    Sch. Dist., 439 U.S. 410, 416 (1979); Rodriguez-Pinto v. Tirado-
    __________ _______________ _______

    Delgado, 982 F.2d 34, 39 (1st Cir. 1993); Kercado-Melendez v.
    _______ ________________

    Aponte-Roque, 829 F.2d 255, 264 (1st Cir. 1987), cert. denied,
    ____________ ____ ______

    486 U.S. 1044 (1988). Either this "but for" causation test, or

    the defendant-employer's "Mt. Healthy defense," ensures that a
    ___________

    plaintiff-employee who would have been dismissed in any event on

    legitimate grounds is not placed in a better position merely by

    virtue of the exercise of a constitutional right irrelevant to

    the adverse employment action. See Mt. Healthy City Sch. Dist.
    ___ ____________________________

    ____________________

    3The defendants do not contend that any appellant held
    either a confidential or a policymaking position for which
    partisan political affiliation might have been a legitimate
    requirement. See Branti, 445 U.S. at 508; Anthony v. Sundlun, 952
    ___ ______ _______ _______
    F.2d 603, 605 (1st Cir. 1991).

    6














    Bd. of Educ. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274, 284 (1977); Acosta-Sepulveda
    ____________ _____ ________________

    v. Hernandez-Purcell, 889 F.2d 9, 13 (1st Cir. 1989); Rosaly, 593
    _________________ ______

    F.2d at 148.

    After a careful summarization of the trial evidence,

    the district court granted defendants' Rule 50(b) motion for

    judgment as a matter of law because the bulk of the circumstan-

    tial evidence relied on by plaintiffs namely, their party

    affiliation and the temporal proximity between their dismissals

    and Mayor Aponte's inauguration was too conjectural and

    conclusory to counteract the "overwhelming" Mt. Healthy defense,
    ___________

    which demonstrated that massive layoffs were compelled as a

    result of the severe fiscal crisis brought on by the overhiring

    of City personnel under the previous administration. See Kauff-
    ___ ______

    man v. Puerto Rico Tel. Co., 841 F.2d 1169, 1172 (1st Cir. 1988)
    ___ ____________________

    (finding that plaintiffs failed to allege the type of specific
    ________

    evidence of politically discriminatory animus required to avoid

    summary judgment).

    The district court opinion compares the Mt. Healthy
    ____________

    burden-shifting mechanism to similar devices used in other

    employment discrimination cases, such as Title VII cases, see,
    ___

    e.g., Chamberlin v. 101 Realty, Inc., 915 F.2d 777, 782 (1st Cir.
    ____ __________ ________________

    1990), and ADEA cases, see, e.g., Goldman v. First Nat'l Bank,
    ___ ____ _______ ________________

    985 F.2d 1113, 1116-18 (1st Cir. 1993). The opinion states that,

    once the defendant interposes the Mt. Healthy defense, "the
    ____________

    plaintiff then has the opportunity to demonstrate that the

    alleged nondiscriminatory reason is a false pretext," which may


    7














    be accomplished either by "'persuading the [jury] that a discrim-

    inatory reason more likely motivated the employer or indirectly

    by showing that [the] employer's proffered explanation is

    unworthy of credence.'" Dist. Ct. Op., at 4 (quoting Texas Dep't
    ___________

    of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 256 (1981) (Title
    _____________________ _______

    VII case)). Although literally correct, the quoted statement

    gives us pause, especially in light of the citation to Burdine.
    _______

    Since a proper allocation of the burden of persuasion is critical

    to our assessment of the district court's decision under Rule

    50(b), we first revisit the applicable burden-shifting procedure.

    Under Title VII, a plaintiff must establish a prima
    _____

    facie case of employment discrimination, at which point a pre-
    _____

    sumption of discrimination attaches to the plaintiff's claim. A

    limited burden of production then passes to the employer to ar-
    ___

    ticulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its actions,
    ________

    a burden which is fully satisfied if the employer submits enough

    evidence to raise a genuine issue of material fact. The employer

    need not submit sufficient evidence to "persuade the [fact

    finder]." Burdine, 450 U.S. at 254. In other words, notwith-
    _______

    standing the interim shift in the burden of production to the

    employer, the plaintiff-employee in a Title VII case "retains the

    burden of persuasion" at all times. Id.
    __ ___ _____ ___

    By contrast, under the Mt. Healthy burden-shifting
    ____________

    mechanism applicable to a First Amendment political discrimina-

    tion claim, the burden of persuasion itself passes to the defen-
    ______ __ __________ ______ ______ __ ___ ______

    dant-employer once the plaintiff produces sufficient evidence
    _____________


    8














    from which the fact finder reasonably can infer that the plain-

    tiff's protected conduct was a "substantial" or "motivating"
    _

    factor behind her dismissal. Accordingly, once the burden of

    persuasion shifts to the defendant-employer, the plaintiff-

    employee will prevail unless the fact finder concludes that the

    defendant has produced enough evidence to establish that the

    plaintiff's dismissal would have occurred in any event for

    nondiscriminatory reasons.

    Therefore, we can sustain a Rule 50(b) reversal in a

    political discrimination case only if: (1) the record evidence

    compelled the conclusion that the plaintiff would have been dis-
    _________

    missed in any event for nondiscriminatory reasons, or (2) the

    plaintiff did not introduce sufficient evidence in the first

    instance to shift the burden of persuasion to the defendants. We

    address these alternatives in turn.


    B. The "Austerity" Defense
    B. The "Austerity" Defense
    _______________________

    Through numerous expert witnesses and statistical

    data,4 defendants attempted to establish that all the chal-

    ____________________

    4For example, defendants presented the following uncon-
    troverted evidence: 1) in 1985, there were approximately 2,900
    City employees, including 906 "transitory" employees, 459 of whom
    had been appointed by the former administration in fiscal year
    1984 alone; 2) the former mayor had made 250-300 appointments
    between July and October 1984; 3) in 1984, despite warnings about
    the City's worsening budgetary problems, the former mayor renewed
    all transitory employees' expiring appointments; 4) by 1985, the
    ___
    personnel payroll comprised 80% of the City's budget; 5) in 1985,
    defendant Aponte inherited a debt of $116 million, which has
    since been reduced to $30 million, and an accumulated deficit of
    $30 million, since reduced to $3 million; and 6) by 1991, there
    were 1,966 City employees, only eight of whom were "transitory"
    employees.

    9














    lenged dismissals were due to the fiscal crisis inherited by

    Mayor Aponte when he took office in 1985, which the defendants

    attributed to mismanagement or illegal patronage hiring practices

    on the part of the previous administration. The jury reasonably

    could have found that the dismissals made by the incoming admin-

    istration resulted in a 32% net reduction of approximately 900

    City employees (from 2,869 to 1,966), and that no new employees

    were hired to perform the duties of the dismissed plaintiffs.

    Thus, the jury reasonably could have concluded that a bona fide

    fiscal crisis would have compelled the vast majority of the

    challenged dismissals even if the targeted employees had not been

    affiliated with the NPP. Defendants' well-deployed

    "austerity" defense apparently thwarted the claims of 240 of the

    255 plaintiffs whose cases went to the jury. But blunt instru-

    ments make crude scalpels, and the Mt. Healthy defense requires
    ___________

    individualized scrutiny by the jury with a view to whether a

    particular plaintiff's position would have been eliminated under

    Aponte's austerity program but for the plaintiff's NPP affilia-
    ___ ___

    tion. In other words, even though defendants' overarching

    austerity defense may have established that massive dismissals

    were imperative, it did not compel jury verdicts adverse to all
    ___

    plaintiffs. General statistical data regarding net work-force
    ___

    reductions may mask individual dismissals which were purely dis-

    criminatory. Here, some plaintiffs testified that their posi-

    tions remained intact after their termination and specifically

    identified their replacements; the jury was free to credit this


    10














    testimony, despite testimony to the contrary. See Veranda Beach
    ___ ______________

    Club Ltd. Partnership v. Western Sur. Co., 936 F.2d 1364, 1385
    ______________________ _________________

    (1st Cir. 1991) ("Once the threshold of sufficiency has been

    crossed, the credibility of a claimant and its witnesses presents

    a question for the jury, not for the trial court and most of

    all, not for the court of appeals.").

    Credibility determinations and evidence weighing are

    not grist for the Rule 50(b) mill. Hendricks, 923 F.2d at 214.
    _________

    As defendants were required to carry the burden of persuasion,
    ______ __ __________

    and the evidence supporting the Mt. Healthy "austerity" defense
    ____________

    did not compel jury acceptance of the claims of all 255 plain-

    tiffs, we turn to the evidence bearing on the individual claims

    of the eleven appellants.


    C. The Individualized Defenses
    C. The Individualized Defenses
    ___________________________

    The defendants attempted to establish their indivi-

    dualized Mt. Healthy defenses at trial based largely on the con-
    ___________

    temporaneous justifications relied on in Mayor Aponte's letters

    of dismissal. See supra p. 3. Under the Mt. Healthy burden-
    ___ _____ ___________

    shifting mechanism, the employer's contemporaneous justifications

    for an adverse employment action serve at least two important

    functions. First, to the extent the reasons given by the employ-

    er at the time of the dismissal are later proven false or frivo-

    lous, the weight of the evidence of discriminatory animus may be

    enhanced, thereby contributing significantly to the threshold Mt.
    ___

    Healthy showing the plaintiff-employee must make in order to
    _______

    shift the ultimate burden of persuasion to the defendant-employ-

    11














    er. Second, once the burden of persuasion has shifted to the

    employer, the jury would be entitled to find for the plaintiff-

    employee were it to conclude that the employer did not offer

    sufficient evidence to demonstrate that (i) the proffered reason

    for the dismissal was genuine or (ii) a bona fide basis existed
    __

    which would have prompted the dismissal without regard to the

    employee's political affiliation. We reserve these individual-

    ized defenses for consideration with plaintiffs' evidence.

    Leaving aside certain proffered justifications for

    employee dismissals in the First Amendment political discrimina-

    tion context,5 only two individualized defenses remain for our

    ____________________

    5Some of the proffered justifications for defendants'
    employment actions must be pared to accord with applicable law.
    Although evidence that an employee was hired in violation of
    Commonwealth law precludes a finding that the employee possessed
    a property interest in continued employment, and hence a cogniza-
    ble due process claim, Kauffman, 841 F.2d at 1173, evidence that
    ___ _______ ________
    an employee's appointment was a "nullity" under Puerto Rico law
    ab initio does not control a claim alleging a violation of the
    __ ______
    employee's First Amendment right of political affiliation, see
    ___
    Hiraldo-Cancel, 925 F.2d at 13 ("'We do not think that a new
    ______________
    administration can use the "nullity" of appointments doctrine as
    a cover for discharges, transfers, and discrimination based
    solely on political affiliation'") (quoting Santiago-Negron v.
    _______________
    Castro-Davila, 865 F.2d 431, 436-37 (1st Cir. 1989)). Although
    _____________
    defendants argue that the rationale of Santiago-Negron applies
    _______________
    only if the new administration continues to hire new personnel in
    _________
    violation of the Personnel Act, Santiago-Negron rested on the
    _______________
    ground that state law does not and cannot define First Amendment
    ______
    rights. Santiago-Negron, 865 F.2d at 436. We do not suggest,
    _______________
    however, that evidence relating to the plaintiff-employee's
    ________
    qualifications under the applicable personnel regulations is
    immaterial. For example, an employee's lack of qualifications
    for the position, at the time of the dismissal, may well be
    __ ___ ____ __ ___ _________
    considered a nondiscriminatory basis for the dismissal. The jury
    must determine whether such a lack of qualifications was a real
    or pretextual justification for the dismissal.
    On analogous reasoning, we discount two variations on the
    same defensive theme. First, the fact that some plaintiffs were
    appointed or promoted during the "veda," the electoral prohibi-

    12














    consideration in the present case, based on the evidence relating

    to each appellant's claim: (1) whether the plaintiff was quali-

    fied for the position at the time of the dismissal, and (2), if

    so, whether the position was eliminated for nondiscriminatory

    reasons.


    D. Plaintiffs' Evidence
    D. Plaintiffs' Evidence
    ____________________

    Plaintiffs offered little direct evidence of discrimin-

    atory animus. But see infra notes 6 & 8. Nevertheless, as we
    ___ ___ _____

    have held, "circumstantial evidence alone can support a finding

    of political discrimination." Anthony, 952 F.2d at 605; Estrada-
    _______ ________

    Izquierdo, 850 F.2d at 14. Certain general observations can be
    _________

    made concerning the circumstantial evidence bearing on the claims

    of all eleven plaintiffs. Mere temporal proximity between a

    change of administration and a public employee's dismissal is

    insufficient to establish discriminatory animus. Cf. Aviles-
    ___ _______


    ____________________

    tion period, is not necessarily controlling in the First Amend-
    ment context. "Puerto Rico law is not controlling in the area of
    ___ ___________
    first amendment law," Santiago-Negron, 865 F.2d at 436 (emphasis
    _______________
    added), and, in this respect, we see no principled distinction
    between the Commonwealth's personnel and electoral laws. Second,
    it is not necessarily a sufficient defense that a plaintiff did
    not meet the legally mandated minimum qualifications for the
    position at the time of appointment. See Hiraldo-Cancel, 925
    __ ___ ____ __ ___________ ___ ______________
    F.2d at 13; Santiago-Negron, 865 F.2d at 436. Although, as a
    _______________
    general rule, an employee's continuing inability to meet the
    __________
    established minimum qualifications for the position can be a
    sufficient nondiscriminatory ground for dismissal, cf. Hiraldo-
    ___ ________
    Cancel, 925 F.2d at 14 (reinstatement is a meaningless remedy
    ______ _____________
    where the employer, "under the aegis of valid personnel stan-
    dards, is empowered to terminate reinstated employees as soon as
    they dust off their desks"), Santiago-Negron's proscription
    _______________
    against post hoc "nullification" would suggest that, to be
    ____ ___
    controlling, the employee's qualifications should be measured as
    __
    of the challenged dismissal.
    __ ___ __________ _________

    13














    Martinez v. Monroig, 963 F.2d 2, 5 (1st Cir. 1992) (citing
    ________ _______

    Kauffman, 841 F.2d at 1172). On the other hand, we have noted
    ________

    that the "highly charged political atmosphere" occasioned by the

    major political shift from the NPP to the PDP throughout the

    Commonwealth of Puerto Rico in 1984, coupled with the fact that

    plaintiffs and defendants are of competing political persuasions,

    may be probative of discriminatory animus. See Kercado-Melendez,
    _________ ___ ________________

    829 F.2d at 264; see also Anthony, 952 F.2d at 606 ("timing" of
    ___ ____ _______

    dismissal may be suggestive of discriminatory animus); Estrada-
    ________

    Izquierdo, 850 F.2d at 15 (same). Moreover, the record discloses
    _________

    that these eleven appellants, for the most part, were not

    quiescent NPP members but played very active or prominent roles

    in its political activities, publicly and vocally supporting the

    reelection campaign of the former mayor. See Nereida-Gonzalez v.
    ___ ________________

    Tirado-Delgado, 990 F.2d 701, 706 (1st Cir. 1993) (noting evi-
    ______________

    dence that plaintiff was "known" party member); Ferrer, 914 F.2d
    ______

    at 312 (noting that plaintiffs' political affiliation was not

    only "well known" but, in some instances, notorious); Kercado-
    ________

    Melendez, 829 F.2d at 264 (noting plaintiff's "long, active, and
    ________

    visible membership" in the opposition party).

    Appellants variously testified at trial that they were

    (1) members of the former mayor's elite "advance team," a corps

    of uniformed functionaries responsible for arranging campaign

    appearances; (2) organizers or participants in pro-NPP political

    rallies; (3) NPP women and youth coordinators; or (4) polling

    unit officers or members of electoral colleges. Thus, the jury


    14














    reasonably could have concluded that those appellants who were

    publicly identified as close political allies of the former NPP

    mayor were more conspicuous targets for political discrimination.

    Standing alone, even the circumstantial evidence that some plain-

    tiffs were especially conspicuous targets for discriminatory

    employment action by defendants would give us serious pause.

    With but two exceptions, however, a careful review of the evi-

    dence reveals that appellants plainly presented other evidence

    sufficient to shift the burden of persuasion, effectively fore-

    closing any realistic claim for Rule 50(b) relief by defendants.

    We briefly recount the dispositive evidentiary considerations

    bearing on each appellant's claim.


    1. Brenda Aponte Osorio
    1. Brenda Aponte Osorio
    ____________________

    Ms. Aponte was dismissed from her "regular" position,

    as an Executive Officer IV, in May 1985. In addition to other

    direct evidence of discriminatory animus,6 the letter of dismiss-

    al from Mayor Aponte stated that Ms. Aponte apparently did not

    possess the qualifications for her position in particular, a

    college degree and "considerable" relevant work experience. In

    fact, the written job description for an Executive Officer IV

    lists a college degree as "desirable preparation," but provides

    that a "combination of preparation and experience will be accept-

    able"; it defines "experience" as "positions of progressive

    ____________________

    6Ms. Aponte states that she was constructively dismissed one
    day after the new administration took office, when she was denied
    access to her office, told that she was "not a person of trust,"
    and given no further duties. Her protests went unanswered.

    15














    responsibility . . . in the public service, including consider-

    able administrative or supervision experience." (Emphasis
    ___________ __________

    added.) At trial, Ms. Aponte testified that she attended college

    for three years, and began working for the City in 1978 as a

    supervisor in the Human Resources Department.7
    __________

    Ms. Aponte presented sufficient evidence to enable a

    jury to find that she possessed the required qualifications, both
    ____

    at the time of her appointment and dismissal. The jury could

    have concluded, therefore, that defendants' contemporaneous

    justification was a mere pretext for political discrimination.

    Cf. Aponte-Santiago v. Lopez-Rivera, 957 F.2d 40, 43 (1st Cir.
    ___ _______________ ____________

    1992) (reversing summary judgment for defendant; noting that

    proof that defendant's asserted nondiscriminatory reason for

    dismissal was pretextual is a "link in a chain of circumstantial

    evidence" of political discrimination which, when coupled with

    allegedly "conclusory" evidence as to the timing of demotion and

    the parties' political affiliation, creates a triable issue which

    the fact finder might resolve in plaintiff's favor); Anthony, 952
    _______

    F.2d at 606 (plaintiff's obvious qualifications can be circum-

    stantial evidence of discriminatory animus); cf. also Burns v.
    ___ ____ _____

    Gadsden State Community College, 908 F.2d 1512, 1519 (11th Cir.
    ________________________________

    1990) (employer's exceedingly narrow interpretation of minimum

    "experience" required for position, coupled with other evidence

    ____________________

    7Even though their individualized defenses, in many instanc-
    es, succumbed to this same "equivalency" virus, permitting the
    jury to make reasonable substitutions of work experience for
    educational background, defendants have not challenged these
    substitutions on appeal.

    16














    of discriminatory animus, creates genuine dispute as to whether

    employer "invented" excuse as pretext to mask improper motive for

    dismissal in ADEA action). The circumstantial evidence of

    pretext, coupled with the direct evidence of discriminatory

    animus, was sufficient to shift the burden of persuasion to

    defendants. As there was no conclusive evidence that Ms. Aponte

    would have been dismissed in any event for a nondiscriminatory

    reason, the jury verdict must be sustained.


    2. Dorotea Collazo Rivera
    2. Dorotea Collazo Rivera
    ______________________

    Ms. Collazo was dismissed from her "regular" position,

    as an Administrative Assistant I, in January 1986.8 The dismiss-

    al letter asserted that Collazo's termination was based on an

    absence of evidence that she was ever qualified for her position.

    However, Collazo's job description merely required a "desirable"

    (high school diploma) education/experience ("general office

    work") mix. Collazo testified that she met the posted academic

    preparation component of the job description. Moreover, there

    was no dispute that Collazo, who was appointed to her final
    __ ___ _____

    position with the City in 1981, previously had been employed as
    ________

    an office clerk for the City since 1976. Thus, Collazo likewise
    _____ ____

    succeeded in shifting the burden of persuasion to the defendants,

    and defendants simply failed to persuade the jury.


    ____________________

    8When the new administration took over, Collazo's secretary
    was transferred to another department and Collazo was locked out
    of her office without warning. Collazo's husband, who was a NPP
    unit chairman, and her daughter, were also dismissed from their
    positions with the City in 1985-86.

    17














    3. Maria Colon de Jesus
    3. Maria Colon de Jesus
    ____________________

    Ms. Colon was dismissed from her "regular" position, as

    a Messenger, in July 1985. The letter of dismissal stated that

    the City's messenger service, with forty-two employees, was

    "excessive and unnecessary," that it must be reduced to ten

    employees as an economy measure, and that the ten employees to be

    retained had been chosen based on an evaluation of their job

    performance and seniority.

    Ms. Colon conceded that the reduction in force did

    occur as defendants indicated, and that she lacked the requisite

    seniority to qualify for one of the ten remaining positions. She

    points to no particular discriminatory conduct, nor does she

    contend that (1) messengers with less seniority or lower perfor-

    mance ratings were retained,9 (2) the City needed more than ten

    messengers in 1985, or (3) defendants replaced any of the thirty-

    two dismissed messengers. As Colon's political affiliation and

    the timing of her dismissal were the only significant probative

    evidence supporting her claim,10 and there was no direct or

    ____________________

    9While conceding that she was among the dismissed messengers
    with the least seniority, Colon nonetheless argues that the
    _____
    selection criteria were suspect because Commonwealth law requires
    that reductions in force be justified first on the basis of
    employee performance ratings, and only then on seniority consid-
    erations. See Delbrey v. Municipio de Carolina, 111 P.R.R. 492
    ___ _______ _____________________
    (1984). The record indicates, however, that defendants made
    their selections only after "considering the criteria of effi-
    _____
    ciency in the performance of messenger duties and the time of
    ______
    services rendered in that capacity." (Emphasis added.)

    10In view of Colon's concession that she lacked the requi-
    site seniority, the other circumstantial evidence was altogether
    too weak to vault the initial Mt. Healthy hurdle. Colon's
    ____________
    political participation was much less frequent and activist than

    18














    circumstantial evidence of pretext, the burden of persuasion

    never shifted to defendants. As no factual dispute was generated

    concerning the legitimacy of the austerity measures, or Colon's

    failure to meet the criteria for retention, the verdict could

    only have been based on conjecture that Colon would not have been

    terminated but for her political affiliation. See Ferrer, 914
    ___ ______

    F.2d at 311 ("plaintiff is not entitled to inferences based on

    speculation and conjecture").11


    4. Hector L. Encarnacion Matos
    4. Hector L. Encarnacion Matos
    ___________________________

    Encarnacion was dismissed from his "regular" position,

    as a Computer Operator I, in August 1985. The dismissal letter

    stated that he lacked the minimum qualifications for the posi-

    tion, which defendants characterized at trial and on appeal as

    requiring an "associate degree" in accounting or computer opera-

    ____________________

    most other appellants. According to her undisputed testimony,
    she merely participated "at the polling places, and on the
    marches in [her] spare time," and served as "secretary for the
    electoral board" in 1984.

    11There are important public policy considerations at stake
    in these circumstances. First, legitimate efforts by newly-
    elected officials to impose fiscal constraints and to foster
    operating efficiencies should not be hamstrung. See Marin-Piazza
    ___ ____________
    v. Aponte-Roque, 873 F.2d 432, 434 (1st Cir. 1989) ("[W]e are
    ____________
    inclined to give a certain amount of leeway to personnel deci-
    sions of new administration officials which implement a facially
    politically neutral reorganization of structure or procedure.").
    Newly-elected officials, however well meaning, might be deterred
    from needed measures to effect economies and efficiencies in
    governmental operations if a discharged employee's political
    affiliation alone were enough to carry her claim to the jury.
    Second, though there was ample opportunity to raise a genuine
    factual dispute regarding the legitimacy of the defendants'
    "austerity" program, the defendants demonstrated, without rebut-
    _______ ______
    tal, that the City has operated for at least six years with a
    ___
    vastly streamlined messenger staff.

    19














    tion. The job description called for a "high school diploma,

    supplemented by courses in mechanized accounting or programming

    and one year of experience in that field," or "[a] combination of
    __

    academic background and experience." Thus, contrary to defen-

    dants' mischaracterization at trial, the job description did not

    require post-secondary school courses sufficient to qualify

    Encarnacion for an associate degree. Moreover, although Encar-

    nacion conceded at trial that his post-secondary school courses

    were not in accounting or programming, and that he had no exper-

    ience in computer programming prior to his appointment, he had
    _____ __ ___ ___________

    acquired two years' working experience on the job before he was

    dismissed in 1985, during which time he had received several

    "excellent" job performance evaluations. See id. at 312-13
    ___ ___

    (noting that jury could credit circumstantial evidence that

    plaintiff "performed her duties very well"); Estrada-Izquierdo,
    _________________

    850 F.2d at 14 (finding "probative" the circumstantial evidence

    that plaintiff "successfully carried out her job" for many

    years). Encarnacion's job description was flexible enough to

    permit the jury to determine that he possessed the necessary

    qualifications, and that the stated reason for his dismissal was

    pretextual.


    5. Maria de Lourdes Escute-Levest
    5. Maria de Lourdes Escute-Levest
    ______________________________

    Ms. Escute-Levest was dismissed from her "regular"

    position, as a Computer Operator I, in October 1985. Initially,

    defendants contended that she was unqualified, but later

    retreated to their "nullity of appointment" justification when

    20














    she protested that she had an associate degree in computer

    programming. See supra note 5. Escute, a member of the former
    ___ _____

    mayor's "advance team," testified at trial without objection

    as to the basis of her knowledge12 that her position was

    refilled following her dismissal, suggesting that it was not as

    expendable as defendants contend on appeal. The cumulative

    circumstantial evidence of discriminatory animus and pretext was

    sufficient to shift the burden of persuasion to defendants and to

    support the jury verdict.


    6. Jesus Garcia Delgado
    6. Jesus Garcia Delgado
    ____________________

    Garcia was dismissed from his "regular" position, as a

    Computer Operator I, in November 1985. Defendants contended that

    Garcia, who possessed an associate degree in computer program-

    ming, did not have the required year of experience in a "related

    field" at the time he was appointed in 1978. Even so, he had

    accumulated seven years' experience by the time he was dismissed,

    and plainly met all qualifications for the position long before

    his dismissal. As the jury could have inferred that the justifi-

    cation offered for the dismissal was pretextual, there was enough

    evidence to shift the burden of persuasion to defendants.


    ____________________

    12At oral argument, defendants contended that plaintiffs'
    trial testimony regarding their replacements was too conclusory
    and lacked factual foundation. However, at trial the defense did
    not object to plaintiffs' testimony based on lack of foundation.
    Thus, the jury was entitled to resolve these issues on the basis
    of its credibility determinations and weighing of the evidence.
    As the evidence was not challenged at trial, and there has been
    no showing of "plain error," Doty v. Sewall, 908 F.2d 1053, 1057
    ____ ______
    (1st Cir. 1990), we reject their claim on appeal.

    21














    7. Victor M. Guadalupe Bobonis
    7. Victor M. Guadalupe Bobonis
    ___________________________

    Guadalupe was dismissed for the second time from his

    "transitory" position, as a municipal guard, in October 1985. In

    January 1985, the occasion of the first dismissal, the only

    justifications defendants offered were that his transitory

    appointment had already lapsed and the position was deemed

    expendable under the "austerity" program. Mayor Aponte abruptly

    rescinded the first dismissal letter on January 25, 1985. In

    June 1985, however, Aponte sent another letter of dismissal,

    asserting that Guadalupe did not meet the minimum qualifications

    for the position, and that his original appointment therefore had

    been illegal. As there was no evidence that Guadalupe did not

    meet the minimum job qualifications, the jury reasonably could

    have concluded that defendants' shifting justifications for

    Guadalupe's dismissal amounted to pretextual posturing.

    Furthermore, Guadalupe testified that twelve or fifteen

    more policemen were hired after his dismissal. See Nereida-
    ___ ________

    Gonzalez, 990 F.2d at 706 (noting that evidence suggesting that
    ________

    defendants' reorganization was a "sham" may be considered proba-

    tive of discriminatory animus); Ferrer, 914 F.2d at 311 ("over-
    ______

    staffing" defense undermined by competent evidence from which

    jury could conclude that defendants later hired replacements to

    perform same functions entailed by plaintiff's position); see
    ___

    also supra note 12.
    ____ _____


    8. Ada N. Perez Colon
    8. Ada N. Perez Colon
    __________________



    22














    Ms. Perez was dismissed from her "regular" position, as

    an Executive Officer I, in September 1985. Defendants contended

    that she was not qualified, and alleged that she had taken an un-

    authorized medical leave, without pay, to undergo surgery. The

    Executive Officer I position requires a four-year college degree

    and administrative or supervisory experience, or an "equivalent

    combination of academic background and experience." Perez, who

    was a member of the former mayor's "advance team," had attended

    college for two years, and had worked for the City since 1980 as
    _____ ____

    an officer for the CETA program and a coordinator at the Human

    Resources Department. Thus, the jury reasonably could have

    determined that her five-year City work experience was sufficient

    to offset the two-year deficit in education. See supra note 7.
    ___ _____

    The jury therefore was free to conclude that both justifications

    for her dismissal were pretextual.


    9. Evelyn Quinones Osorio
    9. Evelyn Quinones Osorio
    ______________________

    Ms. Quinones was dismissed from her "regular" position,

    as an Executive Secretary III, in September 1985. Within two

    weeks after taking office, Mayor Aponte called all mayor's office

    employees together and advised that they were "persons who were

    in trust to the former mayor," and that they would be replaced or

    transferred in "due time." Defendant Martinez also told Qui-

    nones, a member of the former mayor's "advance team," that she

    "didn't have his trust." After training her replacement, Qui-

    nones accepted a transfer out of the mayor's office. She testi-

    fied that officials of the new administration erased her time

    23














    cards and, on one occasion, retained her paycheck for six weeks.

    Defendant Martinez, City personnel officer, told Quinones:

    "[T]hose are injustices but I follow orders from above." (Empha-
    ___ _ ______ ______ ____ _____

    sis added.)

    In July 1985, after Quinones' brief tenure in the new

    secretarial position, Aponte notified her that she would be ter-

    minated because she was unqualified for the position. The rele-

    vant job description called for a two-year secretarial course,

    and four years' secretarial experience, but two years of work

    experience could be substituted for educational experience. When

    Quinones provided satisfactory documentation of her educational

    qualifications, defendants fell back on their "nullity of ap-

    pointment" defense as the sole ground for her September 1985

    dismissal. See supra note 5. Moreover, Osario testified that
    ___ _____

    she had worked as a secretary since 1980, and her final year as

    an Executive Secretary III clearly qualified her for her new

    position. Thus, Quinones presented sufficient direct and circum-

    stantial evidence of discriminatory animus and pretext to shift

    the burden of persuasion.


    10. Carmen Rivera Guadalupe
    10. Carmen Rivera Guadalupe
    _______________________

    Ms. Rivera Guadalupe was dismissed from her "transito-

    ry" positions, as Child Care worker and Secretary, in January

    1986. She was notified that she was being terminated because her

    transitory appointment had lapsed, and the City could no longer

    afford to fund the position. Her husband continued to work for

    the Aponte administration for another five or six years. Like

    24














    plaintiff Colon, Ms. Rivera offered no evidence that the elimina-

    tion of her position was in any way pretextual, nor that she was

    ever replaced, let alone by a PDP member. As political affilia-

    tion and the timing of the dismissal were insufficient to satisfy

    her threshold burden of production,13 the jury verdict must be

    set aside as conjectural.


    11. Luisa Rivera Serrano
    11. Luisa Rivera Serrano
    ____________________

    Ms. Rivera Serrano was dismissed from her "transitory"

    position, as a Clerk I, in August 1985, ostensibly because her

    fixed term of employment had expired. Although the jury reason-

    ably could have inferred that her position, like that of Ms.

    Rivera Guadalupe, would be eliminated on austerity grounds, the

    implicit rationale for her dismissal was undermined by Ms. Rivera

    Serrano's testimony that she was replaced by Rosa Mattos, a PDP

    member. Defendants' attempt to undermine Rivera's testimony, by

    noting that she previously had identified a different person

    (Inez) as her replacement, fails. Not only are we precluded from

    credibility determinations, see Hendricks & Assocs., 923 F.2d at
    ___ ____________________

    214, but Rivera offered a plausible explanation for her inconsis-

    tent responses: both individuals applied for her former posi-

    tion. As there was ample basis for a reasonable inference that

    the proffered ground for the dismissal was pretextual, the jury

    verdict must be upheld.

    ____________________

    13Like Ms. Colon, see supra text accompanying notes 9-11,
    ___ _____
    Ms. Rivera's NPP activities were peripheral and relatively incon-
    spicuous. She served as a polling unit officer for the NPP, and
    chaired the NPP Womens' Movement at her local union.

    25















    CONCLUSION
    CONCLUSION
    __________

    We acknowledge the careful attention the district court

    has given the evidence in this case.14 In the Rule 50(b) con-

    text, however, we are required to recognize that evidence does

    not pass through the jury "lens" unrefracted. Our review con-

    vinces us that these jury verdicts, with two exceptions, must




    ____________________

    14In February 1992, the district court denied defendants'
    first Rule 50(b) motion. After carefully reviewing its "notes,
    defense arguments and the jury verdicts," the court based its
    ruling on the fact that "the jury individually and meticulously
    considered each [of the 255] claim[s]." The closeness of these
    questions is demonstrated by the district court's equally pain-
    staking reconsideration, as well as our own review.
    We nevertheless reject plaintiffs' appeals from the district
    court ruling denying their reinstatement. A denial of reinstate-
    ment is reviewed for "abuse of discretion," Hiraldo-Cancel, 925
    ______________
    F.2d at 13, and we will reverse "only if we are left with a firm
    conviction that [the district court] has committed 'a meaningful
    error in judgment.'" Rosario-Torres, 889 F.2d 314, 323 (1st Cir.
    ______________
    1989) (en banc) (quoting Anderson v. Cryovac, Inc., 862 F.2d 910,
    ________ _____________
    923 (1st Cir. 1988)). It did not. After assiduously weighing
    the equities, the district court rejected the reinstatement
    claims on several sustainable grounds. First, federally com-
    pelled reinstatements to municipal positions implicate serious
    comity and federalism concerns, especially in light of the
    compelling evidence that plaintiffs' appointments were made in
    blatant disregard of Commonwealth and municipal personnel and
    electoral laws, and that the City was operating under severe
    fiscal constraints, both at the time of the dismissals. Id.
    ___
    (noting that, "[i]n shaping equitable remedies, comity concerns
    can loom large," and that "court-ordered reinstatement of ille-
    gally-hired . . . workers strikes a particularly jarring note").
    Second, significant periods of time elapsed after their dismiss-
    als before plaintiffs requested injunctive relief. Id. at 324.
    __
    Finally, some of the harshness inherent in a refusal to reinstate
    is diminished where the employee has been awarded significant
    monetary relief. See Rosario-Torres, 889 F.2d at 322, 324
    ___ ______________
    (contrasting Title VII cases, which do not permit recovery of
    compensatory or punitive damages, with First Amendment political
    discrimination cases, which offer a fuller "palette of available
    make-whole remedies" to offset a denial of reinstatement).

    26














    therefore be reinstated.15

    Judgment in accordance with the verdicts must be rein-
    _______________________________________________________

    stated for all appellants, with the exception of Maria Colon de
    _________________________________________________________________

    Jesus and Carmen Rivera Guadalupe. In all other respects, the
    __________________________________ ___________________________

    district court judgment is affirmed. The case is remanded to the
    ___________________________________ ___________________________

    district court for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith.
    _________________________________________________________________

    Costs are awarded to the nine prevailing appellants.
    ____________________________________________________













    ____________________

    15Aponte also asserts that the verdicts should be vacated as
    inconsistent, since the special verdict did not label Aponte
    "liable" for political discrimination and yet found him liable
    for punitive damages. We reject this contention. A facially
    inconsistent verdict in a civil action no rare phenomenon
    is not an automatic ground for vacating the verdict. See Fair-
    ___ _____
    mount Glass Works v. Cub Fork Coal Co., 287 U.S. 474, 485 (1933).
    _________________ _________________
    The court "must attempt to reconcile the jury's findings, by
    exegesis if necessary . . . before [it is] free to disregard
    [them]." Gallick v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., 372 U.S. 108, 119
    _______ ________________________
    (1963).
    Here, the findings are readily reconcilable. The jury
    charge, to which there was no relevant objection, suggested that
    Aponte's liability and the municipality's liability could go hand
    in hand. Since the special verdict form did not specify the need
    for dual findings on liability, the jury may have reasoned that
    branding the City "liable" necessarily incorporated a finding of
    Aponte's liability as well. Accordingly, in view of the jury's
    clear imposition of liability for punitive damages on Aponte, we
    cannot conclude that the verdict naming only the City "liable"
    for discrimination unambiguously or completely exonerated
    Aponte. Compare DeFeliciano v. DeJesus, 873 F.2d 447, 452 (1st
    _______ ___________ _______
    Cir.) (citing cases in which employee was completely exonerated,
    but employer, whose liability could only derive from employee's
    liability, was found liable), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 850 (1989).
    ____ ______

    27