Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Quigley v. Winter, 598 F.3d 938 (2010)

Citation
Quigley v. Winter, 598 F.3d 938 (2010)
Parent Document
Quigley v. Winter, 598 F.3d 938 (2010)
Effective Date
2010-03-16

Other Sections in This Document (232)

Full Text

858 chars
-5-
II.    DISCUSSION
       A.     Winter’s Claims on Cross-Appeal
       We first address Winter’s claims on cross-appeal. Winter maintains the district
court erred in submitting to the jury, and in denying Winter’s post-trial motions
related to, the following claims: (1) hostile housing environment caused by sexual
harassment; (2) “quid pro quo” sexual harassment; (3) sex discrimination; and
(4) coercion, intimidation, and interference with housing rights. Winter next insists
the district court made the following evidentiary errors: (1) admitting “me too”
testimony from three of Winter’s former female tenants; (2) admitting the SCHRC’s
probable cause determination and testimony from a SCHRC investigator; and
(3) excluding medical records and testimony from a physician’s assistant at Siouxland
Mental Health related to Quigley’s mental health.3