Parks v. Port of Oakland
Appellant Sherri â€œJeanâ€ Parks is employed as a plumber by respondent Port of Oakland (Port). She sued the Port for harassment on the basis of her gender and sexual orientation, for failure to prevent such harassment, and for retaliating against her after she complained of the harassment. The trial court granted the Portâ€™s motion for summary adjudication of the harassment and failure to prevent harassment causes of action, but permitted the retaliation cause of action to proceed to trial.
The jury found that the Port did not retaliate against Parks for complaining that she was being harassed. Accordingly, the trial court entered judgment in favor of the Port. It also denied Parksâ€™s postjudgment motion to tax costs.
On appeal, Parks argues that the trial court erred in granting the Portâ€™s motion for summary adjudication (the Portâ€™s motion), and in sustaining one of the Portâ€™s objections to evidence Parks submitted in opposition to that motion. Parks also contends that the trial court erred in permitting the Port to recover certain disputed cost items. We agree that the excluded evidence was admissible for a limited purpose, but reject all of Parksâ€™s remaining contentions, and accordingly affirm both the judgment and the order denying the motion to tax costs.