{ "attribution": { "source": "legal.exploreworldai.com", "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca1-25-1210-2026-09-21", "cite_as": "NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca1-25-1210-2026-09-21)", "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision", "version": "legal-2026-10-04", "fingerprint": "ewai:se:d79eaf", "proof": "sha256:b7e258241adc12f421f442920e8e20a6453fd602332f4cf0ee0cfb979fdb8255", "jurisdiction": "se", "lang": "en", "publisher": "NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal", "terms": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om" }, "brand_source": "Source: NovaCopilot", "brand": { "product": "NovaCopilot", "platform": "ExploreWorldAI", "infrastructure": "ExploreWorld Legal", "infrastructure_url": "legal.exploreworldai.com", "legal_entity": "Valkiv Ventures AB", "permanent_url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot", "source": "Source: NovaCopilot", "powered_by": "Powered by NovaCopilot", "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor", "contact": "stig@valkiv.com" }, "item": { "schema_version": "1.0.0", "id": "us:ca1-25-1210-2026-09-21", "jurisdiction": "us", "lang": "en", "brand_source": "Source: NovaCopilot", "brand": { "product": "NovaCopilot", "platform": "ExploreWorldAI", "infrastructure": "ExploreWorld Legal", "infrastructure_url": "legal.exploreworldai.com", "legal_entity": "Valkiv Ventures AB", "permanent_url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot", "source": "Source: NovaCopilot", "powered_by": "Powered by NovaCopilot", "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor", "contact": "stig@valkiv.com" }, "sections": [ { "title": "United States Court of Appeals", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "For the First Circuit", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "No. 25-1210", "paragraphs": [ "para_4", "para_5", "para_6" ] }, { "title": "CITY OF SOMERVILLE; JOSEPH CURTATONE, Mayor;", "paragraphs": [ "para_8", "para_9" ] }, { "title": "APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS", "paragraphs": [ "para_12" ] }, { "title": "Before", "paragraphs": [ "para_14", "para_15", "para_16", "para_17", "para_18", "para_19", "para_20", "para_21" ] }, { "title": "September 21, 2026", "paragraphs": [ "para_23" ] }, { "title": "AFRAME, Circuit Judge. This appeal primarily involves", "paragraphs": [ "para_25", "para_26", "para_27", "para_28" ] }, { "title": "Thus, absent consent, a party may not try unpleaded issues without", "paragraphs": [ "para_30", "para_31", "para_32" ] }, { "title": "Massachusetts, police officer, was terminated from his public", "paragraphs": [ "para_34", "para_35" ] }, { "title": "Curtatone, Somerville Police Chief David Fallon, and Somerville", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Police Captain Bernard Cotter (together, the \"defendants\")", "paragraphs": [ "para_38", "para_39", "para_40" ] }, { "title": "City of Somerville in violation of Massachusetts law. He also", "paragraphs": [ "para_42", "para_43", "para_44" ] }, { "title": "While DiFronzo's case proceeded in federal court, the", "paragraphs": [ "para_46", "para_47", "para_48" ] }, { "title": "Mayor Curtatone responded to that order by placing DiFronzo on", "paragraphs": [ "para_50", "para_51", "para_52", "para_53", "para_54", "para_55", "para_56", "para_57", "para_58", "para_59", "para_60", "para_61", "para_62" ] }, { "title": "I. BACKGROUND", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "The dispute between DiFronzo and the defendants", "paragraphs": [ "para_65", "para_66", "para_67", "para_68", "para_69" ] }, { "title": "Machado was independently trying to locate Alvarez", "paragraphs": [ "para_71", "para_72", "para_73", "para_74", "para_75", "para_76", "para_77", "para_78", "para_79", "para_80", "para_81", "para_82" ] }, { "title": "Eventually, DiFronzo obtained search warrants for", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Machado's telephone as part of the investigation into the attack", "paragraphs": [ "para_85" ] }, { "title": "In reviewing the phone data, the trooper saw text messages between", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Machado and DiFronzo suggesting that DiFronzo had helped Machado", "paragraphs": [ "para_88" ] }, { "title": "Alvarez. The trooper reported this information to the Middlesex", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "County District Attorney's Office and the Somerville Police", "paragraphs": [ "para_91", "para_92", "para_93", "para_94", "para_95" ] }, { "title": "Attorney's Office provided the Somerville Police Department with", "paragraphs": [ "para_97", "para_98", "para_99", "para_100", "para_101", "para_102", "para_103" ] }, { "title": "Just over two months later, on May 31, 2017, Chief Fallon", "paragraphs": [ "para_105", "para_106", "para_107", "para_108", "para_109", "para_110" ] }, { "title": "On October 26, 2017, while Captain Cotter's", "paragraphs": [ "para_112", "para_113" ] }, { "title": "Department that he thought \"should be brought to the attention of", "paragraphs": [ "para_115" ] }, { "title": "Police Department had not discharged other employees who had", "paragraphs": [ "para_117", "para_118" ] }, { "title": "1 The letter is named after the United States Supreme", "paragraphs": [ "para_120", "para_121", "para_122", "para_123", "para_124", "para_125" ] }, { "title": "A month later, on November 27, 2017, DiFronzo wrote", "paragraphs": [ "para_127", "para_128", "para_129", "para_130", "para_131", "para_132" ] }, { "title": "In December 2017, Captain Cotter completed his", "paragraphs": [ "para_134" ] }, { "title": "DiFronzo had violated several Somerville Police Department rules", "paragraphs": [ "para_136", "para_137", "para_138", "para_139", "para_140", "para_141", "para_142", "para_143", "para_144", "para_145" ] }, { "title": "Following the termination, DiFronzo appealed the", "paragraphs": [ "para_147", "para_148", "para_149", "para_150", "para_151", "para_152", "para_153", "para_154", "para_155" ] }, { "title": "Amendment rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and (2) for tortious", "paragraphs": [ "para_157", "para_158", "para_159", "para_160", "para_161" ] }, { "title": "On June 4, 2021, about three months after DiFronzo", "paragraphs": [ "para_163", "para_164", "para_165" ] }, { "title": "Police Department detective but (2) denied him back pay for the", "paragraphs": [ "para_167", "para_168", "para_169", "para_170", "para_171", "para_172", "para_173" ] }, { "title": "Following the arbitration decision, the Middlesex", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "District Attorney's Office issued a second Brady letter stating", "paragraphs": [ "para_176", "para_177" ] }, { "title": "Mayor Curtatone instructed the new police chief (Chief Fallon had", "paragraphs": [ "para_179", "para_180", "para_181", "para_182" ] }, { "title": "DiFronzo's placement on paid leave denied him the opportunity to", "paragraphs": [ "para_184" ] }, { "title": "In January 2023, the defendants moved for summary", "paragraphs": [ "para_186", "para_187", "para_188", "para_189", "para_190", "para_191", "para_192", "para_193", "para_194", "para_195", "para_196", "para_197", "para_198", "para_199", "para_200", "para_201", "para_202", "para_203" ] }, { "title": "In relevant part, DiFronzo's portion of the memorandum described", "paragraphs": [ "para_205", "para_206", "para_207" ] }, { "title": "The defendants also recited their version of the City's actions in", "paragraphs": [ "para_209", "para_210", "para_211", "para_212", "para_213" ] }, { "title": "DiFronzo's employment because \"other issues that postdate that", "paragraphs": [ "para_215" ] }, { "title": "Much of the trial focused on the defendants' motivations", "paragraphs": [ "para_217" ] }, { "title": "DiFronzo on paid leave post-arbitration first arose during", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Curtatone's direct examination in the defense case:", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "2 The district court granted the defendants summary", "paragraphs": [ "para_221" ] }, { "title": "We discuss only the First Amendment and tortious interference", "paragraphs": [ "para_223", "para_224" ] }, { "title": "Defense counsel: Do you recall that after", "paragraphs": [ "para_226", "para_227", "para_228", "para_229" ] }, { "title": "Brady letter?", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Curtatone: I do recall that. I do", "paragraphs": [ "para_232" ] }, { "title": "Defense counsel: Do you recall they said", "paragraphs": [ "para_234", "para_235", "para_236", "para_237" ] }, { "title": "Defense counsel: And as a result of the", "paragraphs": [ "para_239", "para_240" ] }, { "title": "Chief . . . to put", "paragraphs": [ "para_242", "para_243", "para_244" ] }, { "title": "On cross-examination, Curtatone was briefly questioned again on", "paragraphs": [ "para_246" ] }, { "title": "Plaintiff's", "paragraphs": [ "para_248", "para_249", "para_250", "para_251", "para_252", "para_253", "para_254" ] }, { "title": "Plaintiff's", "paragraphs": [ "para_256" ] }, { "title": "And when the decision came", "paragraphs": [ "para_258", "para_259" ] }, { "title": "Plaintiff's", "paragraphs": [ "para_261" ] }, { "title": "And were you involved in", "paragraphs": [ "para_263" ] }, { "title": "Detective DiFronzo to", "paragraphs": [ "para_265", "para_266", "para_267", "para_268" ] }, { "title": "Plaintiff's", "paragraphs": [ "para_270" ] }, { "title": "Again, [DiFronzo] had", "paragraphs": [ "para_272", "para_273", "para_274", "para_275", "para_276", "para_277", "para_278", "para_279", "para_280" ] }, { "title": "Whether the jury could consider Mayor Curtatone's", "paragraphs": [ "para_282", "para_283", "para_284", "para_285", "para_286", "para_287", "para_288" ] }, { "title": "DiFronzo disagreed, claiming that the paid-leave issue", "paragraphs": [ "para_290", "para_291", "para_292", "para_293", "para_294", "para_295", "para_296", "para_297" ] }, { "title": "Ultimately, the district court permitted the jury to", "paragraphs": [ "para_299", "para_300", "para_301", "para_302", "para_303", "para_304", "para_305" ] }, { "title": "The jury returned a verdict that was largely in", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "DiFronzo's favor. It found the defendants liable for First", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Amendment retaliation and tortious interference with advantageous", "paragraphs": [ "para_309", "para_310", "para_311", "para_312", "para_313", "para_314", "para_315", "para_316", "para_317", "para_318", "para_319", "para_320", "para_321" ] }, { "title": "It is true, as a general matter, that", "paragraphs": [ "para_323", "para_324", "para_325", "para_326", "para_327", "para_328", "para_329", "para_330", "para_331", "para_332", "para_333", "para_334", "para_335", "para_336", "para_337" ] }, { "title": "2021 decision not to reinstate plaintiff and", "paragraphs": [ "para_339", "para_340", "para_341", "para_342", "para_343" ] }, { "title": "II. DISCUSSION", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "On appeal, the defendants renew the argument that the", "paragraphs": [ "para_346", "para_347" ] }, { "title": "July 2021. Before addressing that issue, we consider the", "paragraphs": [ "para_349", "para_350", "para_351", "para_352" ] }, { "title": "A. The Arbitration Decision", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "We review a preserved challenge to an evidentiary ruling", "paragraphs": [ "para_355" ] }, { "title": "(1st Cir. 2024). An abuse of discretion occurs \"when a material", "paragraphs": [ "para_357", "para_358", "para_359", "para_360" ] }, { "title": "Co., 161 F.3d 77, 83 (1st Cir. 1998)). An error of law is an abuse", "paragraphs": [ "para_362" ] }, { "title": "Prior to trial, the defendants sought to exclude", "paragraphs": [ "para_364", "para_365" ] }, { "title": "DiFronzo's termination, which occurred before the arbitration", "paragraphs": [ "para_367" ] }, { "title": "The district court partially disagreed. It ruled that", "paragraphs": [ "para_369", "para_370" ] }, { "title": "DiFronzo's potential damages. Because the arbitrator ordered", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "DiFronzo reinstated, that order ended the period for which DiFronzo", "paragraphs": [ "para_373", "para_374", "para_375", "para_376", "para_377" ] }, { "title": "Thus, the court concluded that \"to make sense of the damages", "paragraphs": [ "para_379", "para_380", "para_381", "para_382", "para_383" ] }, { "title": "On appeal, the defendants argue against the limited", "paragraphs": [ "para_385", "para_386", "para_387", "para_388", "para_389" ] }, { "title": "In Gardner-Denver, the Supreme Court held that a", "paragraphs": [ "para_391", "para_392", "para_393" ] }, { "title": "Id. at 49. In reaching that conclusion, the Court provided", "paragraphs": [ "para_395", "para_396" ] }, { "title": "See id. at 60 & n.21. In this regard, the Court gave guideposts", "paragraphs": [ "para_398" ] }, { "title": "3 DiFronzo contends that the defendants did not adequately", "paragraphs": [ "para_400", "para_401", "para_402", "para_403", "para_404", "para_405" ] }, { "title": "Title VII\"; (2) \"the degree of procedural fairness in the arbitral", "paragraphs": [ "para_407", "para_408", "para_409", "para_410", "para_411", "para_412" ] }, { "title": "The defendants contend that the district court abused", "paragraphs": [ "para_414", "para_415", "para_416", "para_417", "para_418", "para_419", "para_420" ] }, { "title": "Rather, the court admitted only the arbitrator's bottom-line order", "paragraphs": [ "para_422", "para_423", "para_424", "para_425", "para_426" ] }, { "title": "Gardner-Denver factors are directed toward the \"weight\" that", "paragraphs": [ "para_428", "para_429", "para_430", "para_431", "para_432" ] }, { "title": "For similar reasons, the district court acted well", "paragraphs": [ "para_434", "para_435", "para_436", "para_437" ] }, { "title": "States v. Villa-Guillen, 102 F.4th 508, 518 (1st Cir. 2024). \"A", "paragraphs": [ "para_439", "para_440", "para_441" ] }, { "title": "United States v. Armenteros-Chervoni, 133 F.4th 8, 28 (1st Cir", "paragraphs": [ "para_443" ] }, { "title": "Courts have sometimes excluded arbitral awards on Rule", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "403 grounds when a party seeks to introduce the arbitrator's", "paragraphs": [ "para_446", "para_447" ] }, { "title": "(7th Cir. 1994). Indeed, the District of Massachusetts did so", "paragraphs": [ "para_449", "para_450", "para_451", "para_452", "para_453" ] }, { "title": "918684, at *6 (D. Mass. Mar. 25, 2025). The defendants argue that", "paragraphs": [ "para_455", "para_456" ] }, { "title": "Again, the defendants ignore the limited purpose for", "paragraphs": [ "para_458", "para_459", "para_460", "para_461", "para_462", "para_463", "para_464", "para_465", "para_466", "para_467", "para_468", "para_469", "para_470" ] }, { "title": "The arbitration . . . and this lawsuit are", "paragraphs": [ "para_472", "para_473", "para_474" ] }, { "title": "You are being asked to make a somewhat", "paragraphs": [ "para_476", "para_477", "para_478", "para_479", "para_480", "para_481" ] }, { "title": "Those are different issues with different", "paragraphs": [ "para_483", "para_484", "para_485", "para_486", "para_487", "para_488", "para_489", "para_490", "para_491", "para_492" ] }, { "title": "This instruction effectively dispels the defendants'", "paragraphs": [ "para_494", "para_495", "para_496", "para_497", "para_498", "para_499", "para_500" ] }, { "title": "2002). That is the circumstance here. The jury was told not to", "paragraphs": [ "para_502", "para_503" ] }, { "title": "4 Despite failing to object contemporaneously to the", "paragraphs": [ "para_505", "para_506", "para_507", "para_508", "para_509", "para_510", "para_511", "para_512", "para_513" ] }, { "title": "570 F.3d 16, 21 (1st Cir. 2009). The instruction plainly told the", "paragraphs": [ "para_515", "para_516" ] }, { "title": "United States v. Freeman, 208 F.3d 332, 344 (1st Cir. 2000). Given", "paragraphs": [ "para_518", "para_519", "para_520", "para_521", "para_522", "para_523" ] }, { "title": "B. The Paid-Leave Decision", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "We turn now to whether the district court erred in", "paragraphs": [ "para_526" ] }, { "title": "July 2021 decision to place DiFronzo on paid leave following the", "paragraphs": [ "para_528", "para_529", "para_530", "para_531", "para_532", "para_533", "para_534" ] }, { "title": "5 On appeal, the defendants identify a hodgepodge of", "paragraphs": [ "para_536", "para_537", "para_538", "para_539" ] }, { "title": "States v. Holmquist, 36 F.3d 154, 168 (1st Cir. 1994) (stating", "paragraphs": [ "para_541", "para_542", "para_543", "para_544", "para_545", "para_546", "para_547", "para_548", "para_549" ] }, { "title": "DiFronzo filed his complaint prior to the arbitration decision and", "paragraphs": [ "para_551", "para_552", "para_553", "para_554", "para_555", "para_556", "para_557", "para_558" ] }, { "title": "Resolution of this issue turns on two rules of Federal", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Civil Procedure, Rules 8 and 15(b).6 Rule 8(a) describes the", "paragraphs": [ "para_561", "para_562" ] }, { "title": "We begin with Rule 8. In the federal system, a pleading", "paragraphs": [ "para_564", "para_565" ] }, { "title": "R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). And a court construing a complaint should do", "paragraphs": [ "para_567", "para_568" ] }, { "title": "6 The defendants also argue that the district court's", "paragraphs": [ "para_570", "para_571", "para_572", "para_573", "para_574", "para_575", "para_576" ] }, { "title": "1995); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(e). Nevertheless, a \"fundamental", "paragraphs": [ "para_578", "para_579", "para_580", "para_581" ] }, { "title": "(quoting Rodriguez, 57 F.3d at 1171). That includes the facts on", "paragraphs": [ "para_583" ] }, { "title": "F.3d 1, 5 (1st Cir. 2011) (stating that a complaint must include", "paragraphs": [ "para_585", "para_586", "para_587" ] }, { "title": "DiFronzo does not contend that his complaint", "paragraphs": [ "para_589", "para_590", "para_591", "para_592" ] }, { "title": "Nevertheless, DiFronzo suggests that his complaint", "paragraphs": [ "para_594", "para_595", "para_596", "para_597", "para_598", "para_599", "para_600", "para_601", "para_602", "para_603", "para_604", "para_605", "para_606", "para_607" ] }, { "title": "While we read pleadings generously, see Rodriguez, 57", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "F.3d at 1171, DiFronzo's suggestion that the \"continues to this", "paragraphs": [ "para_610", "para_611", "para_612", "para_613", "para_614", "para_615", "para_616", "para_617", "para_618", "para_619", "para_620", "para_621", "para_622", "para_623", "para_624", "para_625", "para_626" ] }, { "title": "DiFronzo says that even if his original complaint did", "paragraphs": [ "para_628", "para_629", "para_630", "para_631", "para_632", "para_633", "para_634", "para_635", "para_636", "para_637", "para_638", "para_639" ] }, { "title": "194 F. App'x. 604, 607 n.4 (11th Cir. 2006) (per curiam) (stating", "paragraphs": [ "para_641", "para_642", "para_643" ] }, { "title": "While it is preferable for the parties to seek to update", "paragraphs": [ "para_645", "para_646", "para_647" ] }, { "title": "Miller's Federal Practice & Procedure § 1491 (3d ed. 2026). \"Rule", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "15(b) is designed to serve that purpose.\" Id. The Rule provides", "paragraphs": [ "para_650", "para_651", "para_652", "para_653", "para_654" ] }, { "title": "Rule \"does not offer a failsafe for any and every faulty pleading.\"", "paragraphs": [ "para_656", "para_657" ] }, { "title": "The first procedure appears in Rule 15(b)(1). It", "paragraphs": [ "para_659", "para_660", "para_661" ] }, { "title": "This subsection encourages courts to \"freely permit\" such", "paragraphs": [ "para_663", "para_664" ] }, { "title": "Under Rule 15(b)(1), however, \"a court may not sua sponte\" amend", "paragraphs": [ "para_666" ] }, { "title": "7 Rule 15(b)(1) states in full that", "paragraphs": [ "para_668", "para_669", "para_670", "para_671", "para_672", "para_673", "para_674", "para_675", "para_676", "para_677", "para_678", "para_679", "para_680", "para_681" ] }, { "title": "174 F.3d 1150, 1163 n.7 (10th Cir. 1999); see also 3 Moore's", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Federal Practice § 15.18[2] (3d ed.).8 Thus, \"when proper", "paragraphs": [ "para_684", "para_685", "para_686", "para_687" ] }, { "title": "Rule 15(b)(2) provides the second procedure. Unlike", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Rule 15(b)(1), it does not require a party to seek to amend the", "paragraphs": [ "para_690" ] }, { "title": "15(b)(2), \"[w]hen an issue not raised by the pleadings is tried by", "paragraphs": [ "para_692", "para_693" ] }, { "title": "8 That is because parties bear the responsibility for", "paragraphs": [ "para_695" ] }, { "title": "(\"It is not the responsibility of a trial court to wade through", "paragraphs": [ "para_697", "para_698" ] }, { "title": "9 Rule 15(b)(2) provides in full that", "paragraphs": [ "para_700", "para_701", "para_702", "para_703", "para_704", "para_705", "para_706", "para_707", "para_708", "para_709", "para_710" ] }, { "title": "The district court appears not to have applied Rule 15(b)", "paragraphs": [ "para_712", "para_713", "para_714", "para_715", "para_716", "para_717" ] }, { "title": "Civ. P. 15(b). In legal parlance, an \"issue\" is a \"point in", "paragraphs": [ "para_719" ] }, { "title": "Dictionary (12th ed. 2024). \"In federal civil procedure, an issue", "paragraphs": [ "para_721", "para_722", "para_723", "para_724", "para_725" ] }, { "title": "Vicor Corp. v. FII USA Inc., 132 F.4th 1, 6 (1st Cir. 2025)", "paragraphs": [ "para_727", "para_728", "para_729" ] }, { "title": "For example, Rule 52(c) provides that", "paragraphs": [ "para_731", "para_732", "para_733", "para_734", "para_735", "para_736", "para_737", "para_738" ] }, { "title": "Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(c). Rule 52(c) therefore uses \"issue\" to", "paragraphs": [ "para_740", "para_741", "para_742", "para_743" ] }, { "title": "Rule 42 draws a similar distinction. Where there is a", "paragraphs": [ "para_745", "para_746", "para_747" ] }, { "title": "42(b) allows a court in a single action to \"order a separate trial", "paragraphs": [ "para_749", "para_750", "para_751", "para_752" ] }, { "title": "Thus, consistent with its plain meaning, \"issue\" as used", "paragraphs": [ "para_754", "para_755", "para_756", "para_757" ] }, { "title": "Caselaw applying Rule 15(b) also supports the view that", "paragraphs": [ "para_759" ] }, { "title": "Jimenez v. Tuna Vessel Granada, 652 F.2d 415 (5th Cir. 1981), the", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Fifth Circuit reversed a judgment where the plaintiff brought a", "paragraphs": [ "para_762", "para_763", "para_764" ] }, { "title": "Jimenez sought damages based on an injury to his back by asserting", "paragraphs": [ "para_766", "para_767", "para_768", "para_769" ] }, { "title": "416, 420. At trial, however, the plaintiff introduced another", "paragraphs": [ "para_771", "para_772", "para_773", "para_774" ] }, { "title": "Id. at 418. The Fifth Circuit reversed the judgment on the grounds", "paragraphs": [ "para_776", "para_777", "para_778", "para_779", "para_780", "para_781" ] }, { "title": "The Fourth Circuit reached a similar conclusion in Dan", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "Ryan Builders, 783 F.3d 976. In that case, the plaintiff brought", "paragraphs": [ "para_784", "para_785", "para_786", "para_787", "para_788", "para_789", "para_790", "para_791", "para_792", "para_793" ] }, { "title": "These cases demonstrate that Rule 15(b) applies when a", "paragraphs": [ "para_795", "para_796", "para_797", "para_798", "para_799", "para_800", "para_801" ] }, { "title": "We address now whether DiFronzo complied with Rule", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "15(b). We first will consider Rule 15(b)(2). As a reminder, that", "paragraphs": [ "para_804" ] }, { "title": "10 Finally, we note that sometimes litigants avail", "paragraphs": [ "para_806", "para_807", "para_808", "para_809", "para_810", "para_811" ] }, { "title": "Berrios v. Gonzalez-Rosario, 630 F.3d 7, 12 (1st Cir. 2010)", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "(quoting Gener-Villar v. Adcom Grp., Inc., 417 F.3d 201, 205 (1st", "paragraphs": [ "para_814", "para_815", "para_816", "para_817" ] }, { "title": "There was no express consent here. The defendants argued", "paragraphs": [ "para_819", "para_820", "para_821", "para_822", "para_823" ] }, { "title": "That leaves us to consider whether, despite these", "paragraphs": [ "para_825", "para_826", "para_827", "para_828", "para_829", "para_830", "para_831", "para_832" ] }, { "title": "Rodriguez, 57 F.3d at 1172 (citation modified). However, \"the", "paragraphs": [ "para_834", "para_835", "para_836" ] }, { "title": "Id. (citation modified). Accordingly, \"the record must indicate", "paragraphs": [ "para_838", "para_839", "para_840" ] }, { "title": "Here, we recognize that despite the defendants' repeated", "paragraphs": [ "para_842", "para_843", "para_844", "para_845", "para_846", "para_847", "para_848", "para_849", "para_850", "para_851", "para_852", "para_853" ] }, { "title": "Mayor Curtatone testified that he made the decision to", "paragraphs": [ "para_855" ] }, { "title": "Office sending an even more pointed Brady letter after the", "paragraphs": [ "para_857", "para_858" ] }, { "title": "Curtatone's conduct, i.e., he acted against DiFronzo each time the", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "District Attorney's Office issued a Brady letter, which suggests", "paragraphs": [ "para_861", "para_862", "para_863", "para_864", "para_865", "para_866", "para_867", "para_868", "para_869", "para_870" ] }, { "title": "That leaves Rule 15(b)(1), which permits the court to", "paragraphs": [ "para_872", "para_873", "para_874", "para_875", "para_876", "para_877", "para_878", "para_879", "para_880", "para_881" ] }, { "title": "DiFronzo's final response is that the defendants'", "paragraphs": [ "para_883", "para_884", "para_885", "para_886", "para_887", "para_888", "para_889", "para_890", "para_891", "para_892" ] }, { "title": "Pot O'Gold Money Leagues, Inc., 329 F.3d 216, 232 (1st Cir. 2003)", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "(\"A finding that the nonmoving party would not be prejudiced by an", "paragraphs": [ "para_895", "para_896" ] }, { "title": "Second, in any event, there was prejudice. The", "paragraphs": [ "para_898", "para_899", "para_900", "para_901", "para_902" ] }, { "title": "Depending on her testimony, Ballantyne could have provided an", "paragraphs": [ "para_904", "para_905", "para_906", "para_907", "para_908", "para_909", "para_910", "para_911", "para_912", "para_913", "para_914" ] }, { "title": "(stating that the court may grant a continuance to enable the", "paragraphs": [ "para_916" ] }, { "title": "To summarize, the district court correctly observed that", "paragraphs": [ "para_918", "para_919", "para_920", "para_921", "para_922", "para_923", "para_924", "para_925", "para_926" ] }, { "title": "Therefore, the district court erred in permitting the jury to award", "paragraphs": [ "para_928" ] }, { "title": "There is one loose end. The defendants contend that", "paragraphs": [ "para_930", "para_931", "para_932", "para_933", "para_934", "para_935", "para_936", "para_937", "para_938", "para_939", "para_940" ] }, { "title": "III. CONCLUSION", "paragraphs": [] }, { "title": "For these reasons, we reverse the judgment for the", "paragraphs": [ "para_943", "para_944", "para_945" ] } ], "paragraphs": [ { "text": "United States Court of Appeals", "paragraph_id": "para_1" }, { "text": "For the First Circuit", "paragraph_id": "para_2" }, { "text": "No. 25-1210", "paragraph_id": "para_3" }, { "text": "DANTE A. DIFRONZO,", "paragraph_id": "para_4" }, { "text": "Plaintiff, Appellee,", "paragraph_id": "para_5" }, { "text": "v.", "paragraph_id": "para_6" }, { "text": "CITY OF SOMERVILLE; JOSEPH CURTATONE, Mayor;", "paragraph_id": "para_7" }, { "text": "DAVID FALLON, Chief of Police; BERNARD COTTER, Police Captain,", "paragraph_id": "para_8" }, { "text": "Defendants, Appellants.", "paragraph_id": "para_9" }, { "text": "APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT", "paragraph_id": "para_10" }, { "text": "FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS", "paragraph_id": "para_11" }, { "text": "[Hon. F. Dennis Saylor, IV, U.S. District Judge]", "paragraph_id": "para_12" }, { "text": "Before", "paragraph_id": "para_13" }, { "text": "Gelpí, Rikelman, and Aframe,", "paragraph_id": "para_14" }, { "text": "Circuit Judges.", "paragraph_id": "para_15" }, { "text": "Leonard H. Kesten, with whom Alexander Kesten, Michael V.", "paragraph_id": "para_16" }, { "text": "Glennon, and Brody, Hardoon, Perkins & Kesten, LLP, were on brief,", "paragraph_id": "para_17" }, { "text": "for appellants.", "paragraph_id": "para_18" }, { "text": "Peter A. Brown, with whom Brown Legal PLLC, Timothy M. Burke,", "paragraph_id": "para_19" }, { "text": "Jared S. Burke, and Law Offices of Timothy M. Burke, were on brief,", "paragraph_id": "para_20" }, { "text": "for appellee.", "paragraph_id": "para_21" }, { "text": "September 21, 2026", "paragraph_id": "para_22" }, { "text": "- 2 -", "paragraph_id": "para_23" }, { "text": "AFRAME, Circuit Judge. This appeal primarily involves", "paragraph_id": "para_24" }, { "text": "the question of when a party may conform its pleadings to the trial", "paragraph_id": "para_25" }, { "text": "evidence. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure afford parties the", "paragraph_id": "para_26" }, { "text": "right to know in advance the claims and defenses asserted against", "paragraph_id": "para_27" }, { "text": "them and the grounds on which those claims and defenses rest.", "paragraph_id": "para_28" }, { "text": "Thus, absent consent, a party may not try unpleaded issues without", "paragraph_id": "para_29" }, { "text": "amending the complaint. That principle provides the basis for", "paragraph_id": "para_30" }, { "text": "partially reversing the judgment in this employment dispute.", "paragraph_id": "para_31" }, { "text": "Plaintiff Dante DiFronzo, a City of Somerville,", "paragraph_id": "para_32" }, { "text": "Massachusetts, police officer, was terminated from his public", "paragraph_id": "para_33" }, { "text": "employment for alleged on-duty misconduct. DiFronzo fought the", "paragraph_id": "para_34" }, { "text": "termination on two fronts. He sued Somerville Mayor Joseph", "paragraph_id": "para_35" }, { "text": "Curtatone, Somerville Police Chief David Fallon, and Somerville", "paragraph_id": "para_36" }, { "text": "Police Captain Bernard Cotter (together, the \"defendants\")", "paragraph_id": "para_37" }, { "text": "claiming, inter alia, that they terminated his employment in", "paragraph_id": "para_38" }, { "text": "retaliation for his exercise of constitutional rights, 42 U.S.C.", "paragraph_id": "para_39" }, { "text": "§ 1983, and interfered with his advantageous relations with the", "paragraph_id": "para_40" }, { "text": "City of Somerville in violation of Massachusetts law. He also", "paragraph_id": "para_41" }, { "text": "challenged the termination via an arbitration proceeding commenced", "paragraph_id": "para_42" }, { "text": "under the City's collective bargaining agreement with the police", "paragraph_id": "para_43" }, { "text": "union of which DiFronzo was a member.", "paragraph_id": "para_44" }, { "text": "While DiFronzo's case proceeded in federal court, the", "paragraph_id": "para_45" }, { "text": "arbitrator ordered DiFronzo reinstated to his position,", "paragraph_id": "para_46" }, { "text": "determining that there was no just cause for his termination.", "paragraph_id": "para_47" }, { "text": "- 3 -", "paragraph_id": "para_48" }, { "text": "Mayor Curtatone responded to that order by placing DiFronzo on", "paragraph_id": "para_49" }, { "text": "paid administrative leave. DiFronzo never sought to amend his", "paragraph_id": "para_50" }, { "text": "complaint to allege liability based on Curtatone's decision to", "paragraph_id": "para_51" }, { "text": "place him on paid leave but nevertheless was permitted to present", "paragraph_id": "para_52" }, { "text": "evidence at trial about the paid-leave decision as a basis for", "paragraph_id": "para_53" }, { "text": "damages. Although the defendants consistently objected that the", "paragraph_id": "para_54" }, { "text": "paid-leave issue could not be a basis for damages because it was", "paragraph_id": "para_55" }, { "text": "not alleged in the complaint, the district court permitted the", "paragraph_id": "para_56" }, { "text": "jury to consider the paid-leave decision for that purpose. That", "paragraph_id": "para_57" }, { "text": "was error. The motive for the paid-leave decision was an unpleaded", "paragraph_id": "para_58" }, { "text": "issue; absent an amended complaint or the defendants' consent, the", "paragraph_id": "para_59" }, { "text": "issue should not have been tried. Accordingly, we reverse the", "paragraph_id": "para_60" }, { "text": "judgment insofar as it awarded DiFronzo damages based on", "paragraph_id": "para_61" }, { "text": "Curtatone's decision to place him on paid leave.", "paragraph_id": "para_62" }, { "text": "I. BACKGROUND", "paragraph_id": "para_63" }, { "text": "The dispute between DiFronzo and the defendants", "paragraph_id": "para_64" }, { "text": "commenced over a decade ago. In the winter of 2015, DiFronzo", "paragraph_id": "para_65" }, { "text": "worked as a Somerville police detective and was assigned to", "paragraph_id": "para_66" }, { "text": "investigate a burglary in which an individual named Henry Alvarez", "paragraph_id": "para_67" }, { "text": "was a suspect. DiFronzo needed to locate Alvarez and used an", "paragraph_id": "para_68" }, { "text": "informant named Jonathan Machado to help him do so.", "paragraph_id": "para_69" }, { "text": "Machado was independently trying to locate Alvarez", "paragraph_id": "para_70" }, { "text": "because Machado believed that Alvarez had stolen marijuana from", "paragraph_id": "para_71" }, { "text": "him. Machado told DiFronzo that he intended to harm Alvarez if he", "paragraph_id": "para_72" }, { "text": "- 4 -", "paragraph_id": "para_73" }, { "text": "found him. Nevertheless, DiFronzo continued to solicit Machado's", "paragraph_id": "para_74" }, { "text": "help and provided Machado with information about Alvarez's", "paragraph_id": "para_75" }, { "text": "location. Machado eventually found Alvarez and attacked him with", "paragraph_id": "para_76" }, { "text": "a machete. DiFronzo was also responsible for investigating the", "paragraph_id": "para_77" }, { "text": "attack on Alvarez but did not immediately inform his police", "paragraph_id": "para_78" }, { "text": "colleagues about his contacts with Machado, including Machado's", "paragraph_id": "para_79" }, { "text": "desire to locate and harm Alvarez. DiFronzo arrested Machado for", "paragraph_id": "para_80" }, { "text": "assaulting Alvarez about three weeks after the incident and still", "paragraph_id": "para_81" }, { "text": "did not disclose his involvement with Machado.", "paragraph_id": "para_82" }, { "text": "Eventually, DiFronzo obtained search warrants for", "paragraph_id": "para_83" }, { "text": "Machado's telephone as part of the investigation into the attack", "paragraph_id": "para_84" }, { "text": "on Alvarez. A Massachusetts state trooper conducted the search.", "paragraph_id": "para_85" }, { "text": "In reviewing the phone data, the trooper saw text messages between", "paragraph_id": "para_86" }, { "text": "Machado and DiFronzo suggesting that DiFronzo had helped Machado", "paragraph_id": "para_87" }, { "text": "find Alvarez, even after Machado disclosed his intent to harm", "paragraph_id": "para_88" }, { "text": "Alvarez. The trooper reported this information to the Middlesex", "paragraph_id": "para_89" }, { "text": "County District Attorney's Office and the Somerville Police", "paragraph_id": "para_90" }, { "text": "Department.", "paragraph_id": "para_91" }, { "text": "After this disclosure, on September 29, 2016,", "paragraph_id": "para_92" }, { "text": "then-Somerville Police Chief David Fallon placed DiFronzo on", "paragraph_id": "para_93" }, { "text": "administrative leave while the District Attorney's Office", "paragraph_id": "para_94" }, { "text": "investigated DiFronzo's conduct. On March 23, 2017, the District", "paragraph_id": "para_95" }, { "text": "Attorney's Office provided the Somerville Police Department with", "paragraph_id": "para_96" }, { "text": "a copy of a so-called Brady letter about DiFronzo, with a", "paragraph_id": "para_97" }, { "text": "- 5 -", "paragraph_id": "para_98" }, { "text": "coversheet indicating that the District Attorney's Office would", "paragraph_id": "para_99" }, { "text": "provide the letter to defense lawyers in any case in which DiFronzo", "paragraph_id": "para_100" }, { "text": "would testify.1 The letter described DiFronzo's misconduct in", "paragraph_id": "para_101" }, { "text": "relation to the Alvarez assault, including that DiFronzo had made", "paragraph_id": "para_102" }, { "text": "material omissions in relevant police reports.", "paragraph_id": "para_103" }, { "text": "Just over two months later, on May 31, 2017, Chief Fallon", "paragraph_id": "para_104" }, { "text": "further penalized DiFronzo by suspending him for five days without", "paragraph_id": "para_105" }, { "text": "pay because he concealed his role in the attack on Alvarez. Fallon", "paragraph_id": "para_106" }, { "text": "notified DiFronzo that he was also recommending to Mayor Curtatone", "paragraph_id": "para_107" }, { "text": "that DiFronzo's employment be terminated. In August 2017, while", "paragraph_id": "para_108" }, { "text": "the termination recommendation was pending, Chief Fallon assigned", "paragraph_id": "para_109" }, { "text": "Captain Bernard Cotter to formally investigate DiFronzo's conduct.", "paragraph_id": "para_110" }, { "text": "On October 26, 2017, while Captain Cotter's", "paragraph_id": "para_111" }, { "text": "investigation proceeded, DiFronzo wrote to Mayor Curtatone", "paragraph_id": "para_112" }, { "text": "complaining about certain practices at the Somerville Police", "paragraph_id": "para_113" }, { "text": "Department that he thought \"should be brought to the attention of", "paragraph_id": "para_114" }, { "text": "an outside public body.\" For example, DiFronzo alleged that the", "paragraph_id": "para_115" }, { "text": "Police Department had not discharged other employees who had", "paragraph_id": "para_116" }, { "text": "engaged in misconduct that DiFronzo believed was more serious than", "paragraph_id": "para_117" }, { "text": "the allegations against him. DiFronzo specified that one of these", "paragraph_id": "para_118" }, { "text": "1 The letter is named after the United States Supreme", "paragraph_id": "para_119" }, { "text": "Court's seminal opinion in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963),", "paragraph_id": "para_120" }, { "text": "which imposed a due process obligation on the government to", "paragraph_id": "para_121" }, { "text": "disclose favorable information to the defense in criminal cases.", "paragraph_id": "para_122" }, { "text": "- 6 -", "paragraph_id": "para_123" }, { "text": "officers was spared discipline because he was \"personally close\"", "paragraph_id": "para_124" }, { "text": "to Curtatone.", "paragraph_id": "para_125" }, { "text": "A month later, on November 27, 2017, DiFronzo wrote", "paragraph_id": "para_126" }, { "text": "again to Mayor Curtatone alleging that the City was retaliating", "paragraph_id": "para_127" }, { "text": "against him for his earlier letter by keeping him \"in limbo\" on", "paragraph_id": "para_128" }, { "text": "mandatory leave while Chief Fallon's termination recommendation", "paragraph_id": "para_129" }, { "text": "remained pending. In his second letter, DiFronzo stated that he", "paragraph_id": "para_130" }, { "text": "was compelled to report the alleged \"violations of law\" within the", "paragraph_id": "para_131" }, { "text": "Police Department to the Massachusetts Attorney General.", "paragraph_id": "para_132" }, { "text": "In December 2017, Captain Cotter completed his", "paragraph_id": "para_133" }, { "text": "investigation, which DiFronzo labeled a \"sham,\" and concluded that", "paragraph_id": "para_134" }, { "text": "DiFronzo had violated several Somerville Police Department rules", "paragraph_id": "para_135" }, { "text": "and regulations. Chief Fallon adopted Cotter's findings and issued", "paragraph_id": "para_136" }, { "text": "amended administrative charges against DiFronzo. Mayor Curtatone", "paragraph_id": "para_137" }, { "text": "then hired a local attorney to hold hearings to examine the", "paragraph_id": "para_138" }, { "text": "misconduct allegations against DiFronzo. Those hearings lasted", "paragraph_id": "para_139" }, { "text": "from February to April 2018, and they concluded with the attorney", "paragraph_id": "para_140" }, { "text": "recommending DiFronzo's discharge. On May 8, 2018, Curtatone", "paragraph_id": "para_141" }, { "text": "ordered DiFronzo's termination from the Police Department. Soon", "paragraph_id": "para_142" }, { "text": "after, Curtatone and Fallon were quoted in a Boston Globe article", "paragraph_id": "para_143" }, { "text": "about DiFronzo's firing as accusing him of having committed a", "paragraph_id": "para_144" }, { "text": "crime.", "paragraph_id": "para_145" }, { "text": "Following the termination, DiFronzo appealed the", "paragraph_id": "para_146" }, { "text": "decision through neutral arbitration as provided for in the", "paragraph_id": "para_147" }, { "text": "- 7 -", "paragraph_id": "para_148" }, { "text": "collective bargaining agreement between the City and the police", "paragraph_id": "para_149" }, { "text": "union. The arbitration began in October 2018 and lasted until", "paragraph_id": "para_150" }, { "text": "June 2021.", "paragraph_id": "para_151" }, { "text": "While the arbitration was pending, on March 26, 2021,", "paragraph_id": "para_152" }, { "text": "DiFronzo filed a complaint in Middlesex Superior Court alleging,", "paragraph_id": "para_153" }, { "text": "inter alia, claims against the defendants for terminating his", "paragraph_id": "para_154" }, { "text": "employment (1) in retaliation for his exercise of his First", "paragraph_id": "para_155" }, { "text": "Amendment rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and (2) for tortious", "paragraph_id": "para_156" }, { "text": "interference with contractual and advantageous relations in", "paragraph_id": "para_157" }, { "text": "violation of Massachusetts law. The complaint noted the existence", "paragraph_id": "para_158" }, { "text": "of the pending arbitration proceedings but made no further", "paragraph_id": "para_159" }, { "text": "allegations about it. The defendants removed the case to federal", "paragraph_id": "para_160" }, { "text": "court.", "paragraph_id": "para_161" }, { "text": "On June 4, 2021, about three months after DiFronzo", "paragraph_id": "para_162" }, { "text": "initiated his court case and over three years since his", "paragraph_id": "para_163" }, { "text": "termination, the arbitrator released his decision. The arbitrator", "paragraph_id": "para_164" }, { "text": "ordered DiFronzo (1) reinstated to his position as a Somerville", "paragraph_id": "para_165" }, { "text": "Police Department detective but (2) denied him back pay for the", "paragraph_id": "para_166" }, { "text": "three-year period since his termination. In other words, the", "paragraph_id": "para_167" }, { "text": "arbitrator found that while there was no just cause for DiFronzo's", "paragraph_id": "para_168" }, { "text": "termination, there was a sufficient basis to have denied DiFronzo", "paragraph_id": "para_169" }, { "text": "his pay from May 2018 through June 2021. The City challenged the", "paragraph_id": "para_170" }, { "text": "arbitration decision in state court, and that case apparently is", "paragraph_id": "para_171" }, { "text": "ongoing.", "paragraph_id": "para_172" }, { "text": "- 8 -", "paragraph_id": "para_173" }, { "text": "Following the arbitration decision, the Middlesex", "paragraph_id": "para_174" }, { "text": "District Attorney's Office issued a second Brady letter stating", "paragraph_id": "para_175" }, { "text": "that, \"[b]arring extraordinary circumstances,\" it would not call", "paragraph_id": "para_176" }, { "text": "DiFronzo to testify in any future case. After this letter issued,", "paragraph_id": "para_177" }, { "text": "Mayor Curtatone instructed the new police chief (Chief Fallon had", "paragraph_id": "para_178" }, { "text": "retired at this point) to place DiFronzo on paid administrative", "paragraph_id": "para_179" }, { "text": "leave until further notice. DiFronzo received notice of that", "paragraph_id": "para_180" }, { "text": "decision on July 1, 2021. Curtatone left office in January 2022.", "paragraph_id": "para_181" }, { "text": "The new mayor, Katjana Ballantyne, kept DiFronzo on paid leave.", "paragraph_id": "para_182" }, { "text": "DiFronzo's placement on paid leave denied him the opportunity to", "paragraph_id": "para_183" }, { "text": "earn overtime and other additional compensation opportunities.", "paragraph_id": "para_184" }, { "text": "In January 2023, the defendants moved for summary", "paragraph_id": "para_185" }, { "text": "judgment in the federal court case. In their motion, the", "paragraph_id": "para_186" }, { "text": "defendants noted that DiFronzo never amended his complaint \"to", "paragraph_id": "para_187" }, { "text": "include any claims related to the City's decision to place [him]", "paragraph_id": "para_188" }, { "text": "on paid . . . leave in July 2021\" following the arbitration", "paragraph_id": "para_189" }, { "text": "decision that ordered his reinstatement. Thus, the defendants", "paragraph_id": "para_190" }, { "text": "asserted it was not their \"responsibility to recast [DiFronzo's]", "paragraph_id": "para_191" }, { "text": "claims as alleged\" and that they would instead address them \"as", "paragraph_id": "para_192" }, { "text": "defined by the four corners of the complaint.\" The district court", "paragraph_id": "para_193" }, { "text": "agreed with the defendants on this point, stating that it would", "paragraph_id": "para_194" }, { "text": "\"not consider evidence concerning events that occurred after the", "paragraph_id": "para_195" }, { "text": "filing of the complaint, as plaintiff has not sought leave to", "paragraph_id": "para_196" }, { "text": "supplement or amend the complaint.\" Nevertheless, the court denied", "paragraph_id": "para_197" }, { "text": "- 9 -", "paragraph_id": "para_198" }, { "text": "the defendants' summary judgment motion on the First Amendment", "paragraph_id": "para_199" }, { "text": "retaliation claim and the tortious interference claims because", "paragraph_id": "para_200" }, { "text": "there were disputed facts related to the motives for the", "paragraph_id": "para_201" }, { "text": "termination decision.2", "paragraph_id": "para_202" }, { "text": "Prior to trial, the parties filed a joint memorandum.", "paragraph_id": "para_203" }, { "text": "In relevant part, DiFronzo's portion of the memorandum described", "paragraph_id": "para_204" }, { "text": "the facts surrounding the decision to place him on paid leave after", "paragraph_id": "para_205" }, { "text": "the arbitration decision, which he characterized in a later filing", "paragraph_id": "para_206" }, { "text": "as \"highlight[ing]\" the City's \"retaliatory animus\" against him.", "paragraph_id": "para_207" }, { "text": "The defendants also recited their version of the City's actions in", "paragraph_id": "para_208" }, { "text": "response to the arbitration decision but noted that this", "paragraph_id": "para_209" }, { "text": "information was provided \"[f]or purposes of background\" because", "paragraph_id": "para_210" }, { "text": "the \"issues before the court . . . based on what was pleaded\" were", "paragraph_id": "para_211" }, { "text": "limited to the termination decision. The defendants further noted", "paragraph_id": "para_212" }, { "text": "that the trial should be limited to the decision to terminate", "paragraph_id": "para_213" }, { "text": "DiFronzo's employment because \"other issues that postdate that", "paragraph_id": "para_214" }, { "text": "decision were . . . not encompassed by the pleadings.\"", "paragraph_id": "para_215" }, { "text": "Much of the trial focused on the defendants' motivations", "paragraph_id": "para_216" }, { "text": "for DiFronzo's termination. Mayor Curtatone's decision to place", "paragraph_id": "para_217" }, { "text": "DiFronzo on paid leave post-arbitration first arose during", "paragraph_id": "para_218" }, { "text": "Curtatone's direct examination in the defense case:", "paragraph_id": "para_219" }, { "text": "2 The district court granted the defendants summary", "paragraph_id": "para_220" }, { "text": "judgment on other claims and still others were dismissed at trial.", "paragraph_id": "para_221" }, { "text": "We discuss only the First Amendment and tortious interference", "paragraph_id": "para_222" }, { "text": "claims because those are the only claims that reached the jury.", "paragraph_id": "para_223" }, { "text": "- 10 -", "paragraph_id": "para_224" }, { "text": "Defense counsel: Do you recall that after", "paragraph_id": "para_225" }, { "text": "the arbitrator's decision,", "paragraph_id": "para_226" }, { "text": "the District Attorney's", "paragraph_id": "para_227" }, { "text": "[Office] sent a second", "paragraph_id": "para_228" }, { "text": "letter to the department, a", "paragraph_id": "para_229" }, { "text": "Brady letter?", "paragraph_id": "para_230" }, { "text": "Curtatone: I do recall that. I do", "paragraph_id": "para_231" }, { "text": "remember that.", "paragraph_id": "para_232" }, { "text": "Defense counsel: Do you recall they said", "paragraph_id": "para_233" }, { "text": "they were never going to", "paragraph_id": "para_234" }, { "text": "call [DiFronzo] to testify?", "paragraph_id": "para_235" }, { "text": "Curtatone: I do recall it clearly,", "paragraph_id": "para_236" }, { "text": "yes.", "paragraph_id": "para_237" }, { "text": "Defense counsel: And as a result of the", "paragraph_id": "para_238" }, { "text": "second Brady letter, did", "paragraph_id": "para_239" }, { "text": "you then tell [the]", "paragraph_id": "para_240" }, { "text": "Chief . . . to put", "paragraph_id": "para_241" }, { "text": "[DiFronzo] on []paid", "paragraph_id": "para_242" }, { "text": "leave . . . ?", "paragraph_id": "para_243" }, { "text": "Curtatone: Paid leave, yes.", "paragraph_id": "para_244" }, { "text": "On cross-examination, Curtatone was briefly questioned again on", "paragraph_id": "para_245" }, { "text": "this topic:", "paragraph_id": "para_246" }, { "text": "Plaintiff's", "paragraph_id": "para_247" }, { "text": "counsel:", "paragraph_id": "para_248" }, { "text": "[D]o you remember reviewing", "paragraph_id": "para_249" }, { "text": "the arbitrator's decision", "paragraph_id": "para_250" }, { "text": "that was issued with regard", "paragraph_id": "para_251" }, { "text": "to the discipline imposed", "paragraph_id": "para_252" }, { "text": "upon Detective DiFronzo?", "paragraph_id": "para_253" }, { "text": "Curtatone: Yes.", "paragraph_id": "para_254" }, { "text": "Plaintiff's", "paragraph_id": "para_255" }, { "text": "counsel:", "paragraph_id": "para_256" }, { "text": "And when the decision came", "paragraph_id": "para_257" }, { "text": "out, were you still mayor?", "paragraph_id": "para_258" }, { "text": "Curtatone: Yes.", "paragraph_id": "para_259" }, { "text": "Plaintiff's", "paragraph_id": "para_260" }, { "text": "counsel:", "paragraph_id": "para_261" }, { "text": "And were you involved in", "paragraph_id": "para_262" }, { "text": "the decision to not allow", "paragraph_id": "para_263" }, { "text": "Detective DiFronzo to", "paragraph_id": "para_264" }, { "text": "- 11 -", "paragraph_id": "para_265" }, { "text": "return to work as ordered", "paragraph_id": "para_266" }, { "text": "by the arbitrator?", "paragraph_id": "para_267" }, { "text": "Curtatone: Yes.", "paragraph_id": "para_268" }, { "text": "Plaintiff's", "paragraph_id": "para_269" }, { "text": "counsel:", "paragraph_id": "para_270" }, { "text": "Again, [DiFronzo] had", "paragraph_id": "para_271" }, { "text": "complained about your", "paragraph_id": "para_272" }, { "text": "behavior, not only are you", "paragraph_id": "para_273" }, { "text": "making the decision to", "paragraph_id": "para_274" }, { "text": "terminate him, now", "paragraph_id": "para_275" }, { "text": "subsequent to that, you're", "paragraph_id": "para_276" }, { "text": "making the decision to not", "paragraph_id": "para_277" }, { "text": "allow him to return to", "paragraph_id": "para_278" }, { "text": "work, correct?", "paragraph_id": "para_279" }, { "text": "Curtatone: Correct.", "paragraph_id": "para_280" }, { "text": "Whether the jury could consider Mayor Curtatone's", "paragraph_id": "para_281" }, { "text": "decision to place DiFronzo on paid leave as a basis for awarding", "paragraph_id": "para_282" }, { "text": "damages came to a head during the charge conference. In a", "paragraph_id": "para_283" }, { "text": "discussion about the damages instruction, the defendants noted", "paragraph_id": "para_284" }, { "text": "that DiFronzo \"never amended\" to say that the decision to place", "paragraph_id": "para_285" }, { "text": "him on paid leave after the arbitration decision was unlawful, and", "paragraph_id": "para_286" }, { "text": "they therefore argued that the jury could not award damages for", "paragraph_id": "para_287" }, { "text": "that decision because \"it's a different case.\"", "paragraph_id": "para_288" }, { "text": "DiFronzo disagreed, claiming that the paid-leave issue", "paragraph_id": "para_289" }, { "text": "was \"part and parcel of what is before this . . . jury.\" DiFronzo", "paragraph_id": "para_290" }, { "text": "amplified Mayor Curtatone's testimony that \"he was involved in the", "paragraph_id": "para_291" }, { "text": "decision not to allow Detective DiFronzo to be reinstated\" and", "paragraph_id": "para_292" }, { "text": "that Curtatone is \"a defendant in this case.\" The defendants", "paragraph_id": "para_293" }, { "text": "replied, \"all you have to do is look at the", "paragraph_id": "para_294" }, { "text": "- 12 -", "paragraph_id": "para_295" }, { "text": "complaint . . . . [T]his is why you need to amend if you want to", "paragraph_id": "para_296" }, { "text": "make a new claim.\"", "paragraph_id": "para_297" }, { "text": "Ultimately, the district court permitted the jury to", "paragraph_id": "para_298" }, { "text": "award damages based on Mayor Curtatone's post-arbitration decision", "paragraph_id": "para_299" }, { "text": "to place DiFronzo on paid leave. The court, however, asked the", "paragraph_id": "para_300" }, { "text": "jury to specify any damages it was awarding for Curtatone's", "paragraph_id": "para_301" }, { "text": "paid-leave decision so that if \"an appellate court concludes that", "paragraph_id": "para_302" }, { "text": "it was wrong to have anything after July 2021[,] [the date of the", "paragraph_id": "para_303" }, { "text": "paid-leave decision], we will have a record of what the jury's", "paragraph_id": "para_304" }, { "text": "verdict was.\"", "paragraph_id": "para_305" }, { "text": "The jury returned a verdict that was largely in", "paragraph_id": "para_306" }, { "text": "DiFronzo's favor. It found the defendants liable for First", "paragraph_id": "para_307" }, { "text": "Amendment retaliation and tortious interference with advantageous", "paragraph_id": "para_308" }, { "text": "relations claims. For conduct occurring before July 2021, the", "paragraph_id": "para_309" }, { "text": "jury awarded no lost compensation damages and $300,000 in emotional", "paragraph_id": "para_310" }, { "text": "distress damages. For conduct occurring after the paid-leave", "paragraph_id": "para_311" }, { "text": "decision, it also awarded $200,000 in lost compensation damages", "paragraph_id": "para_312" }, { "text": "and $300,000 in emotional distress damages against Mayor", "paragraph_id": "para_313" }, { "text": "Curtatone.", "paragraph_id": "para_314" }, { "text": "The defendants subsequently moved for a new trial,", "paragraph_id": "para_315" }, { "text": "renewing the contention that it was improper to award damages based", "paragraph_id": "para_316" }, { "text": "on Mayor Curtatone's paid-leave decision because DiFronzo", "paragraph_id": "para_317" }, { "text": "\"fail[ed] to amend his pleadings to include allegations\" about", "paragraph_id": "para_318" }, { "text": "- 13 -", "paragraph_id": "para_319" }, { "text": "post-arbitration events. The court denied the motion and rejected", "paragraph_id": "para_320" }, { "text": "the argument:", "paragraph_id": "para_321" }, { "text": "It is true, as a general matter, that", "paragraph_id": "para_322" }, { "text": "pleadings must be amended in order to assert", "paragraph_id": "para_323" }, { "text": "new claims or defenses. However, new", "paragraph_id": "para_324" }, { "text": "developments, or new facts relevant to claims", "paragraph_id": "para_325" }, { "text": "alleged in an original complaint, are", "paragraph_id": "para_326" }, { "text": "routinely adduced through discovery and trial", "paragraph_id": "para_327" }, { "text": "testimony. A common example is the ongoing", "paragraph_id": "para_328" }, { "text": "occurrence of damages (such as medical", "paragraph_id": "para_329" }, { "text": "expenses) arising from a personal injury.", "paragraph_id": "para_330" }, { "text": "Here, plaintiff did not amend the pleadings,", "paragraph_id": "para_331" }, { "text": "instead electing to present post-2021 evidence", "paragraph_id": "para_332" }, { "text": "to the jury as part of an ongoing harm arising", "paragraph_id": "para_333" }, { "text": "from the claim he initially pleaded, rather", "paragraph_id": "para_334" }, { "text": "than as an independent claim. And at trial,", "paragraph_id": "para_335" }, { "text": "defendant Curtatone's testimony on", "paragraph_id": "para_336" }, { "text": "cross-examination provided a link between his", "paragraph_id": "para_337" }, { "text": "2021 decision not to reinstate plaintiff and", "paragraph_id": "para_338" }, { "text": "plaintiff's prior, protected", "paragraph_id": "para_339" }, { "text": "conduct. . . . A reasonable jury could", "paragraph_id": "para_340" }, { "text": "therefore award damages for harm arising in", "paragraph_id": "para_341" }, { "text": "and after 2021 as a result of defendant", "paragraph_id": "para_342" }, { "text": "Curtatone's conduct.", "paragraph_id": "para_343" }, { "text": "II. DISCUSSION", "paragraph_id": "para_344" }, { "text": "On appeal, the defendants renew the argument that the", "paragraph_id": "para_345" }, { "text": "district court incorrectly allowed the jury to award damages based", "paragraph_id": "para_346" }, { "text": "on Mayor Curtatone's decision to place DiFronzo on paid leave in", "paragraph_id": "para_347" }, { "text": "July 2021. Before addressing that issue, we consider the", "paragraph_id": "para_348" }, { "text": "defendants' additional argument that the district court should", "paragraph_id": "para_349" }, { "text": "have excluded from evidence the arbitration decision ordering", "paragraph_id": "para_350" }, { "text": "DiFronzo's reinstatement.", "paragraph_id": "para_351" }, { "text": "- 14 -", "paragraph_id": "para_352" }, { "text": "A. The Arbitration Decision", "paragraph_id": "para_353" }, { "text": "We review a preserved challenge to an evidentiary ruling", "paragraph_id": "para_354" }, { "text": "for an abuse of discretion. Lech v. von Goeler, 92 F.4th 56, 63", "paragraph_id": "para_355" }, { "text": "(1st Cir. 2024). An abuse of discretion occurs \"when a material", "paragraph_id": "para_356" }, { "text": "factor deserving significant weight is ignored, when an improper", "paragraph_id": "para_357" }, { "text": "factor is relied upon, or when all proper and no improper factors", "paragraph_id": "para_358" }, { "text": "are assessed, but the court makes a serious mistake in weighing", "paragraph_id": "para_359" }, { "text": "them.\" Id. (quoting Ruiz-Troche v. Pepsi Cola of P.R. Bottling", "paragraph_id": "para_360" }, { "text": "Co., 161 F.3d 77, 83 (1st Cir. 1998)). An error of law is an abuse", "paragraph_id": "para_361" }, { "text": "of discretion. Id. at 64.", "paragraph_id": "para_362" }, { "text": "Prior to trial, the defendants sought to exclude", "paragraph_id": "para_363" }, { "text": "evidence about the arbitration decision. They argued that such", "paragraph_id": "para_364" }, { "text": "evidence was unduly prejudicial because the federal case was about", "paragraph_id": "para_365" }, { "text": "DiFronzo's termination, which occurred before the arbitration", "paragraph_id": "para_366" }, { "text": "decision issued.", "paragraph_id": "para_367" }, { "text": "The district court partially disagreed. It ruled that", "paragraph_id": "para_368" }, { "text": "understanding the arbitration decision was necessary context for", "paragraph_id": "para_369" }, { "text": "the jury to evaluate the effect of the termination decision on", "paragraph_id": "para_370" }, { "text": "DiFronzo's potential damages. Because the arbitrator ordered", "paragraph_id": "para_371" }, { "text": "DiFronzo reinstated, that order ended the period for which DiFronzo", "paragraph_id": "para_372" }, { "text": "went unpaid due to his termination. Nevertheless, because the", "paragraph_id": "para_373" }, { "text": "arbitrator declined to order back pay, the termination decision", "paragraph_id": "para_374" }, { "text": "still resulted in DiFronzo losing pay for the three-year period", "paragraph_id": "para_375" }, { "text": "between the termination decision and the reinstatement order.", "paragraph_id": "para_376" }, { "text": "- 15 -", "paragraph_id": "para_377" }, { "text": "Thus, the court concluded that \"to make sense of the damages", "paragraph_id": "para_378" }, { "text": "claim,\" the jury needed to know \"that the arbitrator ordered", "paragraph_id": "para_379" }, { "text": "[DiFronzo] reinstated with pay but . . . that he not receive back", "paragraph_id": "para_380" }, { "text": "pay.\" The court held, however, that it would preclude the jury", "paragraph_id": "para_381" }, { "text": "from hearing the arbitrator's reasoning for his decision because", "paragraph_id": "para_382" }, { "text": "such evidence would be unduly prejudicial.", "paragraph_id": "para_383" }, { "text": "On appeal, the defendants argue against the limited", "paragraph_id": "para_384" }, { "text": "admission of the arbitration decision on two grounds. First, they", "paragraph_id": "para_385" }, { "text": "contend that the district court misapplied the Supreme Court's", "paragraph_id": "para_386" }, { "text": "decision in Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co., 415 U.S. 36 (1974),", "paragraph_id": "para_387" }, { "text": "and second, that the court abused its discretion in admitting the", "paragraph_id": "para_388" }, { "text": "evidence under Fed. R. Evid. 403. We reject both arguments.3", "paragraph_id": "para_389" }, { "text": "In Gardner-Denver, the Supreme Court held that a", "paragraph_id": "para_390" }, { "text": "plaintiff who seeks to vindicate his rights under a", "paragraph_id": "para_391" }, { "text": "nondiscrimination clause of a collective-bargaining agreement may", "paragraph_id": "para_392" }, { "text": "also pursue a claim under a federal anti-discrimination statute.", "paragraph_id": "para_393" }, { "text": "Id. at 49. In reaching that conclusion, the Court provided", "paragraph_id": "para_394" }, { "text": "guidance on when a court may substantively use an arbitrator's", "paragraph_id": "para_395" }, { "text": "decision in deciding the merits of a subsequent statutory claim.", "paragraph_id": "para_396" }, { "text": "See id. at 60 & n.21. In this regard, the Court gave guideposts", "paragraph_id": "para_397" }, { "text": "to consider in deciding the \"weight to be accorded an arbitral\"", "paragraph_id": "para_398" }, { "text": "3 DiFronzo contends that the defendants did not adequately", "paragraph_id": "para_399" }, { "text": "preserve the Gardner-Denver argument in the district court. We", "paragraph_id": "para_400" }, { "text": "bypass the preservation issue because even if we assume the", "paragraph_id": "para_401" }, { "text": "argument was preserved, it fails.", "paragraph_id": "para_402" }, { "text": "- 16 -", "paragraph_id": "para_403" }, { "text": "ruling. Id. at 60 n.21. These include: (1) whether the provisions", "paragraph_id": "para_404" }, { "text": "of the collective bargaining agreement \"conform substantially with", "paragraph_id": "para_405" }, { "text": "Title VII\"; (2) \"the degree of procedural fairness in the arbitral", "paragraph_id": "para_406" }, { "text": "forum\"; (3) the \"adequacy of the record with respect to the issue", "paragraph_id": "para_407" }, { "text": "of discrimination\"; and (4) \"the special competence of particular", "paragraph_id": "para_408" }, { "text": "arbitrators.\" Id. The Court noted that where an arbitral decision", "paragraph_id": "para_409" }, { "text": "\"gives full consideration to an employee's Title VII rights, a", "paragraph_id": "para_410" }, { "text": "court may properly accord it great weight,\" especially when the", "paragraph_id": "para_411" }, { "text": "issue presented \"is solely one of fact.\" Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_412" }, { "text": "The defendants contend that the district court abused", "paragraph_id": "para_413" }, { "text": "its discretion because it admitted the arbitration decision", "paragraph_id": "para_414" }, { "text": "without analyzing the Gardner-Denver factors. This argument", "paragraph_id": "para_415" }, { "text": "misunderstands the purpose of these factors. They guide a district", "paragraph_id": "para_416" }, { "text": "court's evaluation of arbitration decisions as substantive", "paragraph_id": "para_417" }, { "text": "evidence of discrimination when adjudicating a similar case under", "paragraph_id": "para_418" }, { "text": "a federal anti-discrimination law. Here, the court did not admit", "paragraph_id": "para_419" }, { "text": "the arbitration decision as substantive evidence of retaliation.", "paragraph_id": "para_420" }, { "text": "Rather, the court admitted only the arbitrator's bottom-line order", "paragraph_id": "para_421" }, { "text": "of reinstatement without back pay to provide context for the jury", "paragraph_id": "para_422" }, { "text": "in calculating damages for the termination decision. The court,", "paragraph_id": "para_423" }, { "text": "however, prevented the jury from hearing the arbitrator's", "paragraph_id": "para_424" }, { "text": "reasoning precisely because it did not want the jury's substantive", "paragraph_id": "para_425" }, { "text": "judgment to be influenced by that reasoning. Because the", "paragraph_id": "para_426" }, { "text": "Gardner-Denver factors are directed toward the \"weight\" that", "paragraph_id": "para_427" }, { "text": "- 17 -", "paragraph_id": "para_428" }, { "text": "should be afforded an arbitration decision in deciding the merits", "paragraph_id": "para_429" }, { "text": "of a discrimination claim, those factors are inapposite here given", "paragraph_id": "para_430" }, { "text": "the limited, non-substantive purpose for which the court admitted", "paragraph_id": "para_431" }, { "text": "the arbitration decision. See id.", "paragraph_id": "para_432" }, { "text": "For similar reasons, the district court acted well", "paragraph_id": "para_433" }, { "text": "within its discretion by admitting the arbitration decision for a", "paragraph_id": "para_434" }, { "text": "limited purpose under Fed. R. Evid. 403. That Rule requires", "paragraph_id": "para_435" }, { "text": "exclusion of evidence when the probative value of the evidence is", "paragraph_id": "para_436" }, { "text": "substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. United", "paragraph_id": "para_437" }, { "text": "States v. Villa-Guillen, 102 F.4th 508, 518 (1st Cir. 2024). \"A", "paragraph_id": "para_438" }, { "text": "district court . . . is afforded especially wide latitude in", "paragraph_id": "para_439" }, { "text": "making Rule 403 determinations, which are disturbed only", "paragraph_id": "para_440" }, { "text": "rarely -- and in extraordinarily compelling circumstances.\"", "paragraph_id": "para_441" }, { "text": "United States v. Armenteros-Chervoni, 133 F.4th 8, 28 (1st Cir", "paragraph_id": "para_442" }, { "text": "2025) (citation modified).", "paragraph_id": "para_443" }, { "text": "Courts have sometimes excluded arbitral awards on Rule", "paragraph_id": "para_444" }, { "text": "403 grounds when a party seeks to introduce the arbitrator's", "paragraph_id": "para_445" }, { "text": "decision as substantive evidence in support of the claim before", "paragraph_id": "para_446" }, { "text": "the court. See, e.g., Jackson v. Bunge Corp., 40 F.3d 239, 246", "paragraph_id": "para_447" }, { "text": "(7th Cir. 1994). Indeed, the District of Massachusetts did so", "paragraph_id": "para_448" }, { "text": "recently in Hayes v. Town of Dalton because \"[t]he arbitrator's", "paragraph_id": "para_449" }, { "text": "decision address[ed] questions that [were] at the core of this", "paragraph_id": "para_450" }, { "text": "case and there [was therefore] a risk that a jury would afford the", "paragraph_id": "para_451" }, { "text": "arbitrator's decision undue weight.\" No. 3:21-cv-30055, 2025 WL", "paragraph_id": "para_452" }, { "text": "- 18 -", "paragraph_id": "para_453" }, { "text": "918684, at *6 (D. Mass. Mar. 25, 2025). The defendants argue that", "paragraph_id": "para_454" }, { "text": "we should apply the Hayes court's reasoning here to find an abuse", "paragraph_id": "para_455" }, { "text": "of discretion.", "paragraph_id": "para_456" }, { "text": "Again, the defendants ignore the limited purpose for", "paragraph_id": "para_457" }, { "text": "which the district court admitted the arbitration decision in this", "paragraph_id": "para_458" }, { "text": "case. The parties had not agreed on the compensatory damages that", "paragraph_id": "para_459" }, { "text": "would follow from concluding that DiFronzo was unlawfully", "paragraph_id": "para_460" }, { "text": "terminated. Thus, the jury was responsible for determining both", "paragraph_id": "para_461" }, { "text": "liability and, if necessary, damages. The jury would be unable to", "paragraph_id": "para_462" }, { "text": "make a damages calculation without knowing that the arbitrator had", "paragraph_id": "para_463" }, { "text": "ordered DiFronzo reinstated but also had declined to order back", "paragraph_id": "para_464" }, { "text": "pay for the time that he was out of work because of the termination", "paragraph_id": "para_465" }, { "text": "decision. In other words, knowledge of this aspect of the arbitral", "paragraph_id": "para_466" }, { "text": "decision was necessary so the jury would not inadvertently over- or", "paragraph_id": "para_467" }, { "text": "undervalue damages. The court admitted the evidence only for this", "paragraph_id": "para_468" }, { "text": "purpose. And to make that point clear, the court provided the", "paragraph_id": "para_469" }, { "text": "following limiting instruction:", "paragraph_id": "para_470" }, { "text": "The arbitration . . . and this lawsuit are", "paragraph_id": "para_471" }, { "text": "kind of proceeding on parallel paths. The", "paragraph_id": "para_472" }, { "text": "arbitrator made a decision under the", "paragraph_id": "para_473" }, { "text": "collective bargaining agreement.", "paragraph_id": "para_474" }, { "text": "You are being asked to make a somewhat", "paragraph_id": "para_475" }, { "text": "different decision or set of decisions", "paragraph_id": "para_476" }, { "text": "[regarding] whether Mr. DiFronzo's", "paragraph_id": "para_477" }, { "text": "constitutional rights were violated or whether", "paragraph_id": "para_478" }, { "text": "the defendants improperly interfered with his", "paragraph_id": "para_479" }, { "text": "employment relationship.", "paragraph_id": "para_480" }, { "text": "- 19 -", "paragraph_id": "para_481" }, { "text": "Those are different issues with different", "paragraph_id": "para_482" }, { "text": "standards. The evidence in the two", "paragraph_id": "para_483" }, { "text": "proceedings overlaps quite a bit, but you are", "paragraph_id": "para_484" }, { "text": "to make your own separate independent", "paragraph_id": "para_485" }, { "text": "decision. Your decision could align with the", "paragraph_id": "para_486" }, { "text": "arbitrator or it could be completely different", "paragraph_id": "para_487" }, { "text": "or it could be different in part. It's totally", "paragraph_id": "para_488" }, { "text": "up to you, but you should not assume that the", "paragraph_id": "para_489" }, { "text": "arbitrator got it right, that he had better", "paragraph_id": "para_490" }, { "text": "information or evidence than you had or had", "paragraph_id": "para_491" }, { "text": "better judgment.", "paragraph_id": "para_492" }, { "text": "This instruction effectively dispels the defendants'", "paragraph_id": "para_493" }, { "text": "concern that admitting the arbitration decision \"invited the jury", "paragraph_id": "para_494" }, { "text": "to substitute [the arbitrator's] legal and factual conclusions for", "paragraph_id": "para_495" }, { "text": "their own.\" We have noted before that a \"careful limiting", "paragraph_id": "para_496" }, { "text": "instruction given by the trial court\" to the jury \"as to the", "paragraph_id": "para_497" }, { "text": "limited purpose for which [evidence] was to be considered\" can", "paragraph_id": "para_498" }, { "text": "have a \"salutary effect\" that alleviates the impact of unfair", "paragraph_id": "para_499" }, { "text": "prejudice. United States v. Smith, 292 F.3d 90, 100-01 (1st Cir.", "paragraph_id": "para_500" }, { "text": "2002). That is the circumstance here. The jury was told not to", "paragraph_id": "para_501" }, { "text": "use the arbitration decision in deciding the merits of DiFronzo's", "paragraph_id": "para_502" }, { "text": "claims, and we presume that jurors follow instructions.4 See", "paragraph_id": "para_503" }, { "text": "4 Despite failing to object contemporaneously to the", "paragraph_id": "para_504" }, { "text": "limiting instruction quoted above at trial, the defendants now", "paragraph_id": "para_505" }, { "text": "attempt to challenge it on appeal. Specifically, they critique", "paragraph_id": "para_506" }, { "text": "the instruction's wording, claiming that it misstates the jury's", "paragraph_id": "para_507" }, { "text": "role by suggesting that the jury should decide whether it agreed", "paragraph_id": "para_508" }, { "text": "with the arbitration decision and that the instruction, taken as", "paragraph_id": "para_509" }, { "text": "a whole, encourages the jury to \"align\" with the arbitration", "paragraph_id": "para_510" }, { "text": "decision. Even assuming that this challenge is preserved, the", "paragraph_id": "para_511" }, { "text": "claim fails. We review an objection to the form and wording of an", "paragraph_id": "para_512" }, { "text": "instruction for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Gonzalez,", "paragraph_id": "para_513" }, { "text": "570 F.3d 16, 21 (1st Cir. 2009). The instruction plainly told the", "paragraph_id": "para_514" }, { "text": "jury that it was to make a \"separate and independent decision\" on", "paragraph_id": "para_515" }, { "text": "- 20 -", "paragraph_id": "para_516" }, { "text": "United States v. Freeman, 208 F.3d 332, 344 (1st Cir. 2000). Given", "paragraph_id": "para_517" }, { "text": "the limited purpose for which the arbitration decision was admitted", "paragraph_id": "para_518" }, { "text": "and the clear instruction delineating that purpose, we see no abuse", "paragraph_id": "para_519" }, { "text": "of discretion in allowing the jury to learn the basics of the", "paragraph_id": "para_520" }, { "text": "arbitral decision so that it could understand that decision's", "paragraph_id": "para_521" }, { "text": "relationship to potential damages arising from DiFronzo's", "paragraph_id": "para_522" }, { "text": "termination.5", "paragraph_id": "para_523" }, { "text": "B. The Paid-Leave Decision", "paragraph_id": "para_524" }, { "text": "We turn now to whether the district court erred in", "paragraph_id": "para_525" }, { "text": "permitting the jury to award damages based on Mayor Curtatone's", "paragraph_id": "para_526" }, { "text": "July 2021 decision to place DiFronzo on paid leave following the", "paragraph_id": "para_527" }, { "text": "arbitration decision ordering his reinstatement. The defendants", "paragraph_id": "para_528" }, { "text": "argue that the paid-leave decision was not part of the case because", "paragraph_id": "para_529" }, { "text": "the claims before it, even though it learned of the arbitrator's", "paragraph_id": "para_530" }, { "text": "ruling on related claims. We do not see how the district court", "paragraph_id": "para_531" }, { "text": "could have been clearer in explaining that the jury was not to", "paragraph_id": "para_532" }, { "text": "give weight to the arbitration decision in conducting its own", "paragraph_id": "para_533" }, { "text": "evaluation of the evidence.", "paragraph_id": "para_534" }, { "text": "5 On appeal, the defendants identify a hodgepodge of", "paragraph_id": "para_535" }, { "text": "testimony which they argue should have been excluded as", "paragraph_id": "para_536" }, { "text": "inadmissible hearsay. These arguments are unpreserved because the", "paragraph_id": "para_537" }, { "text": "defendants either made no objection at all during the trial or", "paragraph_id": "para_538" }, { "text": "offered only a general objection specifying no grounds. See United", "paragraph_id": "para_539" }, { "text": "States v. Holmquist, 36 F.3d 154, 168 (1st Cir. 1994) (stating", "paragraph_id": "para_540" }, { "text": "that a party does not preserve a claim regarding the admission of", "paragraph_id": "para_541" }, { "text": "evidence by offering only a general objection to the district", "paragraph_id": "para_542" }, { "text": "court). Thus, to the extent any review is available, it would be", "paragraph_id": "para_543" }, { "text": "for plain error. Id. at 168 n.15. The defendants, however, have", "paragraph_id": "para_544" }, { "text": "not addressed any of the plain-error factors and, in any event,", "paragraph_id": "para_545" }, { "text": "their arguments as to each identified piece of testimony are", "paragraph_id": "para_546" }, { "text": "cursory at best. We therefore deem these hearsay claims waived.", "paragraph_id": "para_547" }, { "text": "See United States v. Baxter, 179 F.4th 73, 91 (1st Cir. 2026).", "paragraph_id": "para_548" }, { "text": "- 21 -", "paragraph_id": "para_549" }, { "text": "DiFronzo filed his complaint prior to the arbitration decision and", "paragraph_id": "para_550" }, { "text": "never sought to amend the complaint to add allegations that the", "paragraph_id": "para_551" }, { "text": "subsequent paid-leave decision was unlawful. DiFronzo responds", "paragraph_id": "para_552" }, { "text": "that the complaint was sufficient to encapsulate the paid-leave", "paragraph_id": "para_553" }, { "text": "decision, and in any event, he was not required to amend the", "paragraph_id": "para_554" }, { "text": "complaint because the paid-leave decision related to the overall", "paragraph_id": "para_555" }, { "text": "employment dispute addressed in the complaint; the paid-leave", "paragraph_id": "para_556" }, { "text": "decision was explored in discovery; and Curtatone was not", "paragraph_id": "para_557" }, { "text": "prejudiced from having to defend the paid-leave decision at trial.", "paragraph_id": "para_558" }, { "text": "Resolution of this issue turns on two rules of Federal", "paragraph_id": "para_559" }, { "text": "Civil Procedure, Rules 8 and 15(b).6 Rule 8(a) describes the", "paragraph_id": "para_560" }, { "text": "requirements for stating a claim for relief. Rule 15(b) describes", "paragraph_id": "para_561" }, { "text": "when unpleaded issues may be presented at trial.", "paragraph_id": "para_562" }, { "text": "We begin with Rule 8. In the federal system, a pleading", "paragraph_id": "para_563" }, { "text": "asserting a claim need only provide \"a short and plain statement", "paragraph_id": "para_564" }, { "text": "of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.\" Fed.", "paragraph_id": "para_565" }, { "text": "R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). And a court construing a complaint should do", "paragraph_id": "para_566" }, { "text": "so \"generously, paying more attention to substance than to form.\"", "paragraph_id": "para_567" }, { "text": "Rodriguez v. Doral Mortg. Corp., 57 F.3d 1168, 1171 (1st Cir.", "paragraph_id": "para_568" }, { "text": "6 The defendants also argue that the district court's", "paragraph_id": "para_569" }, { "text": "decision to permit the jury to award damages for the decision to", "paragraph_id": "para_570" }, { "text": "place DiFronzo on paid leave following the arbitration ruling", "paragraph_id": "para_571" }, { "text": "violated their due process rights. Because we conclude that the", "paragraph_id": "para_572" }, { "text": "defendants prevail on their challenge to this aspect of the jury", "paragraph_id": "para_573" }, { "text": "verdict based on their Rule 15(b) arguments, we do not reach their", "paragraph_id": "para_574" }, { "text": "due process argument.", "paragraph_id": "para_575" }, { "text": "- 22 -", "paragraph_id": "para_576" }, { "text": "1995); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(e). Nevertheless, a \"fundamental", "paragraph_id": "para_577" }, { "text": "purpose of pleadings under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is", "paragraph_id": "para_578" }, { "text": "to afford the opposing party fair notice of the claims asserted", "paragraph_id": "para_579" }, { "text": "against [them] and the grounds on which those claims rest.\" Rinsky", "paragraph_id": "para_580" }, { "text": "v. Cushman & Wakefield, Inc., 918 F.3d 8, 17 (1st Cir. 2019)", "paragraph_id": "para_581" }, { "text": "(quoting Rodriguez, 57 F.3d at 1171). That includes the facts on", "paragraph_id": "para_582" }, { "text": "which liability is premised. Artuso v. Vertex Pharms., Inc., 637", "paragraph_id": "para_583" }, { "text": "F.3d 1, 5 (1st Cir. 2011) (stating that a complaint must include", "paragraph_id": "para_584" }, { "text": "\"factual content\" showing \"that the defendant is liable for the", "paragraph_id": "para_585" }, { "text": "misconduct alleged\" (quoting Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678", "paragraph_id": "para_586" }, { "text": "(2009))).", "paragraph_id": "para_587" }, { "text": "DiFronzo does not contend that his complaint", "paragraph_id": "para_588" }, { "text": "specifically alleges that Mayor Curtatone unlawfully placed him on", "paragraph_id": "para_589" }, { "text": "paid leave after the arbitration decision. Of course, he does not", "paragraph_id": "para_590" }, { "text": "do so because there was no arbitration decision until several", "paragraph_id": "para_591" }, { "text": "months after DiFronzo filed his complaint.", "paragraph_id": "para_592" }, { "text": "Nevertheless, DiFronzo suggests that his complaint", "paragraph_id": "para_593" }, { "text": "contained sufficient allegations to permit him to proceed to trial", "paragraph_id": "para_594" }, { "text": "on the paid-leave decision as a basis for liability because the", "paragraph_id": "para_595" }, { "text": "complaint \"expressly alleged . . . that he was seeking damages for", "paragraph_id": "para_596" }, { "text": "the ongoing harm arising from [the defendants'] retaliatory", "paragraph_id": "para_597" }, { "text": "conduct.\" More specifically, DiFronzo relies on the following", "paragraph_id": "para_598" }, { "text": "complaint allegation as providing notice that the paid-leave", "paragraph_id": "para_599" }, { "text": "decision was a basis for liability: \"The damage done to the", "paragraph_id": "para_600" }, { "text": "- 23 -", "paragraph_id": "para_601" }, { "text": "[p]laintiff's reputation by his wrongful termination and media", "paragraph_id": "para_602" }, { "text": "exploitation by the [d]efendants continues to this day.\" DiFronzo", "paragraph_id": "para_603" }, { "text": "suggests that the \"damage done . . . continues to this day\"", "paragraph_id": "para_604" }, { "text": "language encapsulates everything that Mayor Curtatone did to him,", "paragraph_id": "para_605" }, { "text": "including placing him on paid leave after the partially favorable", "paragraph_id": "para_606" }, { "text": "arbitration decision.", "paragraph_id": "para_607" }, { "text": "While we read pleadings generously, see Rodriguez, 57", "paragraph_id": "para_608" }, { "text": "F.3d at 1171, DiFronzo's suggestion that the \"continues to this", "paragraph_id": "para_609" }, { "text": "day\" allegation encompasses Mayor Curtatone's post-arbitration", "paragraph_id": "para_610" }, { "text": "conduct takes this solicitude too far. Fairly read, DiFronzo's", "paragraph_id": "para_611" }, { "text": "pleading refers to continuing damages arising from the termination", "paragraph_id": "para_612" }, { "text": "decision and the media coverage of that decision. When DiFronzo", "paragraph_id": "para_613" }, { "text": "filed his pleading, he was still unpaid because of the termination", "paragraph_id": "para_614" }, { "text": "decision and suffered continuing financial harm from that", "paragraph_id": "para_615" }, { "text": "decision. And the alleged ongoing harm to his reputation was", "paragraph_id": "para_616" }, { "text": "caused by statements that Mayor Curtatone made to the press in", "paragraph_id": "para_617" }, { "text": "relation to the termination decision. Thus, the complaint's", "paragraph_id": "para_618" }, { "text": "reference to damages \"continu[ing] to this day\" refers to harm", "paragraph_id": "para_619" }, { "text": "arising from the termination decision, not the separate paid-leave", "paragraph_id": "para_620" }, { "text": "decision. As the district court recognized, both when issuing its", "paragraph_id": "para_621" }, { "text": "summary judgment ruling and when ultimately allowing the jury to", "paragraph_id": "para_622" }, { "text": "impose liability based on the paid-leave decision, there is nothing", "paragraph_id": "para_623" }, { "text": "in the complaint suggesting that DiFronzo was claiming damages", "paragraph_id": "para_624" }, { "text": "from that decision.", "paragraph_id": "para_625" }, { "text": "- 24 -", "paragraph_id": "para_626" }, { "text": "DiFronzo says that even if his original complaint did", "paragraph_id": "para_627" }, { "text": "not raise the paid-leave issue, he still could raise the issue at", "paragraph_id": "para_628" }, { "text": "trial without filing a supplemental pleading. Rule 15(d) permits", "paragraph_id": "para_629" }, { "text": "a court to allow a supplemental pleading \"setting out any", "paragraph_id": "para_630" }, { "text": "transaction, occurrence, or event that happened after the date of", "paragraph_id": "para_631" }, { "text": "the pleading to be supplemented.\" Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(d). DiFronzo", "paragraph_id": "para_632" }, { "text": "thus could have covered the pleading gap in this case by obtaining", "paragraph_id": "para_633" }, { "text": "the district court's permission to serve a supplemental pleading", "paragraph_id": "para_634" }, { "text": "setting forth the post-arbitration events, including the", "paragraph_id": "para_635" }, { "text": "paid-leave decision. Choosing not to do so was not necessarily", "paragraph_id": "para_636" }, { "text": "fatal; it meant, however, that for DiFronzo to have properly", "paragraph_id": "para_637" }, { "text": "litigated the paid-leave issue at trial, he had to comply with", "paragraph_id": "para_638" }, { "text": "Rule 15(b). See Heinkel ex rel. Heinkel v. Sch. Bd. of Lee Cnty.,", "paragraph_id": "para_639" }, { "text": "194 F. App'x. 604, 607 n.4 (11th Cir. 2006) (per curiam) (stating", "paragraph_id": "para_640" }, { "text": "that even though the plaintiff failed to adhere to Rule 15(d)'s", "paragraph_id": "para_641" }, { "text": "requirements, an unpleaded issue was properly considered at trial", "paragraph_id": "para_642" }, { "text": "because there was compliance with Rule 15(b)).", "paragraph_id": "para_643" }, { "text": "While it is preferable for the parties to seek to update", "paragraph_id": "para_644" }, { "text": "the pleadings before trial, sometimes that does not happen and", "paragraph_id": "para_645" }, { "text": "thus it \"becomes necessary to adjust the pleadings to reflect the", "paragraph_id": "para_646" }, { "text": "case as it actually was litigated in the courtroom.\" 6A Wright &", "paragraph_id": "para_647" }, { "text": "Miller's Federal Practice & Procedure § 1491 (3d ed. 2026). \"Rule", "paragraph_id": "para_648" }, { "text": "15(b) is designed to serve that purpose.\" Id. The Rule provides", "paragraph_id": "para_649" }, { "text": "two \"quite different\" procedures for conforming the pleadings to", "paragraph_id": "para_650" }, { "text": "- 25 -", "paragraph_id": "para_651" }, { "text": "the trial evidence. Id. These procedures together are intended", "paragraph_id": "para_652" }, { "text": "to \"avoid the tyranny of formalism\"; Rule 15(b) is construed", "paragraph_id": "para_653" }, { "text": "\"liberally\" to achieve this objective. Id. Nevertheless, the", "paragraph_id": "para_654" }, { "text": "Rule \"does not offer a failsafe for any and every faulty pleading.\"", "paragraph_id": "para_655" }, { "text": "Dan Ryan Builders, Inc. v. Crystal Ridge Dev., Inc., 783 F.3d 976,", "paragraph_id": "para_656" }, { "text": "983 (4th Cir. 2015).", "paragraph_id": "para_657" }, { "text": "The first procedure appears in Rule 15(b)(1). It", "paragraph_id": "para_658" }, { "text": "authorizes a court to permit amendment of the pleadings when a", "paragraph_id": "para_659" }, { "text": "party objects that evidence introduced at trial is not within the", "paragraph_id": "para_660" }, { "text": "\"issues\" raised by the pleadings. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(b)(1).", "paragraph_id": "para_661" }, { "text": "This subsection encourages courts to \"freely permit\" such", "paragraph_id": "para_662" }, { "text": "amendments when doing so will aid consideration of the merits and", "paragraph_id": "para_663" }, { "text": "the objecting party has failed to demonstrate prejudice.7 Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_664" }, { "text": "Under Rule 15(b)(1), however, \"a court may not sua sponte\" amend", "paragraph_id": "para_665" }, { "text": "the pleadings when an objection is made; rather, a formal motion", "paragraph_id": "para_666" }, { "text": "7 Rule 15(b)(1) states in full that", "paragraph_id": "para_667" }, { "text": "[i]f, at trial, a party objects that evidence", "paragraph_id": "para_668" }, { "text": "is not within the issues raised in the", "paragraph_id": "para_669" }, { "text": "pleadings, the court may permit the pleadings", "paragraph_id": "para_670" }, { "text": "to be amended. The court should freely permit", "paragraph_id": "para_671" }, { "text": "an amendment when doing so will aid in", "paragraph_id": "para_672" }, { "text": "presenting the merits and the objecting party", "paragraph_id": "para_673" }, { "text": "fails to satisfy the court that the evidence", "paragraph_id": "para_674" }, { "text": "would prejudice that party's action or defense", "paragraph_id": "para_675" }, { "text": "on the merits. The court may grant a", "paragraph_id": "para_676" }, { "text": "continuance to enable the objecting party to", "paragraph_id": "para_677" }, { "text": "meet the evidence.", "paragraph_id": "para_678" }, { "text": "Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(b)(1).", "paragraph_id": "para_679" }, { "text": "- 26 -", "paragraph_id": "para_680" }, { "text": "is required. Moncrief v. Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Co.,", "paragraph_id": "para_681" }, { "text": "174 F.3d 1150, 1163 n.7 (10th Cir. 1999); see also 3 Moore's", "paragraph_id": "para_682" }, { "text": "Federal Practice § 15.18[2] (3d ed.).8 Thus, \"when proper", "paragraph_id": "para_683" }, { "text": "objections have been made but no Rule 15(b) motion has been filed,", "paragraph_id": "para_684" }, { "text": "the lack of prejudice to a party does not provide a basis for an", "paragraph_id": "para_685" }, { "text": "amendment.\" Green Country Food Mkt., Inc. v. Bottling Grp., LLC,", "paragraph_id": "para_686" }, { "text": "371 F.3d 1275, 1281 (10th Cir. 2004).", "paragraph_id": "para_687" }, { "text": "Rule 15(b)(2) provides the second procedure. Unlike", "paragraph_id": "para_688" }, { "text": "Rule 15(b)(1), it does not require a party to seek to amend the", "paragraph_id": "para_689" }, { "text": "pleadings. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(b)(2). Rather, under Rule", "paragraph_id": "para_690" }, { "text": "15(b)(2), \"[w]hen an issue not raised by the pleadings is tried by", "paragraph_id": "para_691" }, { "text": "the parties' express or implied consent, it must be treated in all", "paragraph_id": "para_692" }, { "text": "respects as if raised in the pleadings.\"9 Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_693" }, { "text": "8 That is because parties bear the responsibility for", "paragraph_id": "para_694" }, { "text": "articulating their claims. See Dan Ryan Builders, 783 F.3d at 985", "paragraph_id": "para_695" }, { "text": "(\"It is not the responsibility of a trial court to wade through", "paragraph_id": "para_696" }, { "text": "ambiguously or incorrectly labeled allegations in pursuit of any", "paragraph_id": "para_697" }, { "text": "potential basis for awarding relief.\").", "paragraph_id": "para_698" }, { "text": "9 Rule 15(b)(2) provides in full that", "paragraph_id": "para_699" }, { "text": "[w]hen an issue not raised by the pleadings is", "paragraph_id": "para_700" }, { "text": "tried by the parties' express or implied", "paragraph_id": "para_701" }, { "text": "consent, it must be treated in all respects as", "paragraph_id": "para_702" }, { "text": "if raised in the pleadings. A party may", "paragraph_id": "para_703" }, { "text": "move -- at any time, even after judgment -- to", "paragraph_id": "para_704" }, { "text": "amend the pleadings to conform them to the", "paragraph_id": "para_705" }, { "text": "evidence and to raise an unpleaded issue. But", "paragraph_id": "para_706" }, { "text": "failure to amend does not affect the result of", "paragraph_id": "para_707" }, { "text": "the trial of that issue.", "paragraph_id": "para_708" }, { "text": "Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(b)(2).", "paragraph_id": "para_709" }, { "text": "- 27 -", "paragraph_id": "para_710" }, { "text": "The district court appears not to have applied Rule 15(b)", "paragraph_id": "para_711" }, { "text": "when permitting the jury to award damages based on the paid-leave", "paragraph_id": "para_712" }, { "text": "decision because it thought that, while \"pleadings must be amended", "paragraph_id": "para_713" }, { "text": "in order to assert new claims or defenses,\" there is no such", "paragraph_id": "para_714" }, { "text": "requirement for the introduction of unpleaded factual theories of", "paragraph_id": "para_715" }, { "text": "liability. That is incorrect.", "paragraph_id": "para_716" }, { "text": "Rule 15(b) applies to an unpleaded \"issue.\" Fed. R.", "paragraph_id": "para_717" }, { "text": "Civ. P. 15(b). In legal parlance, an \"issue\" is a \"point in", "paragraph_id": "para_718" }, { "text": "dispute between two or more parties.\" Issue, Black's Law", "paragraph_id": "para_719" }, { "text": "Dictionary (12th ed. 2024). \"In federal civil procedure, an issue", "paragraph_id": "para_720" }, { "text": "is a single, certain, and material point arising out of the", "paragraph_id": "para_721" }, { "text": "allegations and contentions of the parties.\" Id. (citation", "paragraph_id": "para_722" }, { "text": "modified). Consistent with this understanding, on a point in", "paragraph_id": "para_723" }, { "text": "dispute, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure distinguish \"issue\"", "paragraph_id": "para_724" }, { "text": "from \"claim\" in a way that gives \"issue\" a more factual hue. Cf.", "paragraph_id": "para_725" }, { "text": "Vicor Corp. v. FII USA Inc., 132 F.4th 1, 6 (1st Cir. 2025)", "paragraph_id": "para_726" }, { "text": "(comparing \"issue\" with \"claim\" in the context of a 28 U.S.C.", "paragraph_id": "para_727" }, { "text": "§ 1659 action and noting that \"issue\" means \"fundamental factual", "paragraph_id": "para_728" }, { "text": "and legal allegations\").", "paragraph_id": "para_729" }, { "text": "For example, Rule 52(c) provides that", "paragraph_id": "para_730" }, { "text": "[i]f a party has been fully heard on an issue", "paragraph_id": "para_731" }, { "text": "during a nonjury trial and the court finds", "paragraph_id": "para_732" }, { "text": "against the party on that issue, the court may", "paragraph_id": "para_733" }, { "text": "enter judgment against the party on a claim or", "paragraph_id": "para_734" }, { "text": "defense that, under the controlling law, can", "paragraph_id": "para_735" }, { "text": "be maintained or defeated only with a", "paragraph_id": "para_736" }, { "text": "favorable finding on that issue.\"", "paragraph_id": "para_737" }, { "text": "- 28 -", "paragraph_id": "para_738" }, { "text": "Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(c). Rule 52(c) therefore uses \"issue\" to", "paragraph_id": "para_739" }, { "text": "describe a court's determination that will resolve a \"claim\" under", "paragraph_id": "para_740" }, { "text": "\"controlling law.\" See id. In other words, \"issue\" connotes a", "paragraph_id": "para_741" }, { "text": "subsidiary determination necessary to resolve a claim. Such", "paragraph_id": "para_742" }, { "text": "subsidiary findings often involve factual determinations.", "paragraph_id": "para_743" }, { "text": "Rule 42 draws a similar distinction. Where there is a", "paragraph_id": "para_744" }, { "text": "\"common question of law or fact\" in multiple actions, Rule 42(a)", "paragraph_id": "para_745" }, { "text": "permits the court to \"join for hearing or trial any or all matters", "paragraph_id": "para_746" }, { "text": "at issue in the actions.\" Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a)(1). And Rule", "paragraph_id": "para_747" }, { "text": "42(b) allows a court in a single action to \"order a separate trial", "paragraph_id": "para_748" }, { "text": "of one or more separate issues, claims, crossclaims,", "paragraph_id": "para_749" }, { "text": "counterclaims, or third-party claims.\" Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(b). We", "paragraph_id": "para_750" }, { "text": "read this language to mean that \"issue\" is not synonymous with", "paragraph_id": "para_751" }, { "text": "\"claim.\"", "paragraph_id": "para_752" }, { "text": "Thus, consistent with its plain meaning, \"issue\" as used", "paragraph_id": "para_753" }, { "text": "in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure operates below the level", "paragraph_id": "para_754" }, { "text": "of a claim, defense, crossclaim, counterclaim, or third-party", "paragraph_id": "para_755" }, { "text": "claim. It refers to the constituent parts of a claim or defense,", "paragraph_id": "para_756" }, { "text": "including central points of factual dispute.", "paragraph_id": "para_757" }, { "text": "Caselaw applying Rule 15(b) also supports the view that", "paragraph_id": "para_758" }, { "text": "\"issue\" applies to central points of factual disagreement. In", "paragraph_id": "para_759" }, { "text": "Jimenez v. Tuna Vessel Granada, 652 F.2d 415 (5th Cir. 1981), the", "paragraph_id": "para_760" }, { "text": "Fifth Circuit reversed a judgment where the plaintiff brought a", "paragraph_id": "para_761" }, { "text": "- 29 -", "paragraph_id": "para_762" }, { "text": "claim based on one factual predicate, but the court awarded damages", "paragraph_id": "para_763" }, { "text": "based on a different, unpleaded predicate. The plaintiff in", "paragraph_id": "para_764" }, { "text": "Jimenez sought damages based on an injury to his back by asserting", "paragraph_id": "para_765" }, { "text": "a claim that the boat was unseaworthy. Id. at 415-16. Before", "paragraph_id": "para_766" }, { "text": "trial, the plaintiff asserted a sole factual theory of", "paragraph_id": "para_767" }, { "text": "unseaworthiness, i.e., that the navigator's conduct in operating", "paragraph_id": "para_768" }, { "text": "fishing equipment rocked the boat and caused the injury. Id. at", "paragraph_id": "para_769" }, { "text": "416, 420. At trial, however, the plaintiff introduced another", "paragraph_id": "para_770" }, { "text": "factual theory for his unseaworthiness claim, i.e., that the", "paragraph_id": "para_771" }, { "text": "condition of certain other equipment and bad weather caused the", "paragraph_id": "para_772" }, { "text": "injury. Id. at 420. The district court awarded damages only on", "paragraph_id": "para_773" }, { "text": "the latter theory regarding equipment condition and bad weather.", "paragraph_id": "para_774" }, { "text": "Id. at 418. The Fifth Circuit reversed the judgment on the grounds", "paragraph_id": "para_775" }, { "text": "that Rule 15(b) was not satisfied because there was neither express", "paragraph_id": "para_776" }, { "text": "nor implied consent to try this additional factual basis for", "paragraph_id": "para_777" }, { "text": "liability. Id. at 420-22. The appellate court held that, even", "paragraph_id": "para_778" }, { "text": "though the plaintiff prevailed on his original unseaworthiness", "paragraph_id": "para_779" }, { "text": "claim, the judgment could not stand because he did so by proving", "paragraph_id": "para_780" }, { "text": "an unpleaded issue for how the boat was unseaworthy. Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_781" }, { "text": "The Fourth Circuit reached a similar conclusion in Dan", "paragraph_id": "para_782" }, { "text": "Ryan Builders, 783 F.3d 976. In that case, the plaintiff brought", "paragraph_id": "para_783" }, { "text": "a breach of contract claim asserting violations of various", "paragraph_id": "para_784" }, { "text": "provisions of an amended purchase agreement. Id. at 979. The", "paragraph_id": "para_785" }, { "text": "district court rejected the plaintiff's argument that Rule 15(b)", "paragraph_id": "para_786" }, { "text": "- 30 -", "paragraph_id": "para_787" }, { "text": "permitted him to obtain damages based on the breach of a different", "paragraph_id": "para_788" }, { "text": "contract. Id. at 982-83. The court of appeals affirmed,", "paragraph_id": "para_789" }, { "text": "concluding that because there was no amendment of the pleadings or", "paragraph_id": "para_790" }, { "text": "consent from the defendant under Rule 15(b), the plaintiff could", "paragraph_id": "para_791" }, { "text": "not offer a contract other than the one he pleaded as the basis", "paragraph_id": "para_792" }, { "text": "for his breach-of-contract claim.10 Id. at 983-84.", "paragraph_id": "para_793" }, { "text": "These cases demonstrate that Rule 15(b) applies when a", "paragraph_id": "para_794" }, { "text": "party does not change the legal nature of his claim but offers a", "paragraph_id": "para_795" }, { "text": "different factual predicate for the claim. That is what DiFronzo", "paragraph_id": "para_796" }, { "text": "did here. His complaint alleges claims of retaliation for the", "paragraph_id": "para_797" }, { "text": "exercise of constitutional rights and interference with", "paragraph_id": "para_798" }, { "text": "advantageous relations based only on the termination decision; he", "paragraph_id": "para_799" }, { "text": "therefore had to comply with Rule 15(b) to try his case based on", "paragraph_id": "para_800" }, { "text": "the unpleaded paid-leave decision.", "paragraph_id": "para_801" }, { "text": "We address now whether DiFronzo complied with Rule", "paragraph_id": "para_802" }, { "text": "15(b). We first will consider Rule 15(b)(2). As a reminder, that", "paragraph_id": "para_803" }, { "text": "provision provides that an unpleaded issue must be treated in all", "paragraph_id": "para_804" }, { "text": "10 Finally, we note that sometimes litigants avail", "paragraph_id": "para_805" }, { "text": "themselves of Rule 15(b) \"when it is to the party's advantage for", "paragraph_id": "para_806" }, { "text": "issue-preclusion purposes to have the record show that a particular", "paragraph_id": "para_807" }, { "text": "issue has been determined.\" 6A Wright & Miller's Federal Practice", "paragraph_id": "para_808" }, { "text": "& Procedure § 1491 (3d ed. 2026) (emphasis added). And, of course,", "paragraph_id": "para_809" }, { "text": "issue preclusion -- unlike claim preclusion -- is about the", "paragraph_id": "para_810" }, { "text": "relitigation of a \"fact essential for rendering a judgment.\" Cruz", "paragraph_id": "para_811" }, { "text": "Berrios v. Gonzalez-Rosario, 630 F.3d 7, 12 (1st Cir. 2010)", "paragraph_id": "para_812" }, { "text": "(quoting Gener-Villar v. Adcom Grp., Inc., 417 F.3d 201, 205 (1st", "paragraph_id": "para_813" }, { "text": "Cir. 2005) (per curiam)).", "paragraph_id": "para_814" }, { "text": "- 31 -", "paragraph_id": "para_815" }, { "text": "respects as if raised in the pleadings so long as the parties", "paragraph_id": "para_816" }, { "text": "provide express or implied consent to try the issue. Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_817" }, { "text": "There was no express consent here. The defendants argued", "paragraph_id": "para_818" }, { "text": "throughout this litigation that DiFronzo could not present the", "paragraph_id": "para_819" }, { "text": "paid-leave decision as a basis for damages because it was not a", "paragraph_id": "para_820" }, { "text": "pleaded issue in the complaint. The defendants made this assertion", "paragraph_id": "para_821" }, { "text": "at the summary judgment stage, when filing their pretrial", "paragraph_id": "para_822" }, { "text": "memorandum, at trial, and in post-trial motions.", "paragraph_id": "para_823" }, { "text": "That leaves us to consider whether, despite these", "paragraph_id": "para_824" }, { "text": "objections, the defendants still provided implicit consent based", "paragraph_id": "para_825" }, { "text": "on their trial conduct. We have recognized that the \"trial of", "paragraph_id": "para_826" }, { "text": "unpleaded issues by implied consent is not lightly to be inferred", "paragraph_id": "para_827" }, { "text": "under Rule 15(b) in light of the notice demands of procedural due", "paragraph_id": "para_828" }, { "text": "process.\" In re Fustolo, 896 F.3d 76, 86 (1st Cir. 2018) (citation", "paragraph_id": "para_829" }, { "text": "modified). As such, \"consent to the trial of an [unpleaded] issue", "paragraph_id": "para_830" }, { "text": "may be implied if, during the trial, a party acquiesces in the", "paragraph_id": "para_831" }, { "text": "introduction of evidence which is relevant only to that issue.\"", "paragraph_id": "para_832" }, { "text": "Rodriguez, 57 F.3d at 1172 (citation modified). However, \"the", "paragraph_id": "para_833" }, { "text": "introduction of evidence directly relevant to a pleaded issue", "paragraph_id": "para_834" }, { "text": "cannot be the basis for a founded claim that the opposing party", "paragraph_id": "para_835" }, { "text": "should have realized that a new issue was infiltrating the case.\"", "paragraph_id": "para_836" }, { "text": "Id. (citation modified). Accordingly, \"the record must indicate", "paragraph_id": "para_837" }, { "text": "that the parties understood that the evidence was aimed at an", "paragraph_id": "para_838" }, { "text": "unpleaded issue.\" Id. (citation modified).", "paragraph_id": "para_839" }, { "text": "- 32 -", "paragraph_id": "para_840" }, { "text": "Here, we recognize that despite the defendants' repeated", "paragraph_id": "para_841" }, { "text": "objections to the jury considering the paid-leave issue as a basis", "paragraph_id": "para_842" }, { "text": "for liability, the defendants were the first party to introduce", "paragraph_id": "para_843" }, { "text": "trial evidence about Mayor Curtatone's decision to place DiFronzo", "paragraph_id": "para_844" }, { "text": "on paid leave after the arbitration decision. On our reading,", "paragraph_id": "para_845" }, { "text": "however, the defendants introduced evidence about the paid-leave", "paragraph_id": "para_846" }, { "text": "decision because it related to their motivation for the earlier", "paragraph_id": "para_847" }, { "text": "termination decision, which was the central trial issue based on", "paragraph_id": "para_848" }, { "text": "the pleadings. The defendants contended that the decision to", "paragraph_id": "para_849" }, { "text": "terminate DiFronzo was non-retaliatory because it was an", "paragraph_id": "para_850" }, { "text": "appropriate response to the Middlesex District Attorney's Office's", "paragraph_id": "para_851" }, { "text": "issuance of a Brady letter, which substantially limited DiFronzo's", "paragraph_id": "para_852" }, { "text": "ability to serve as a government witness in future cases.", "paragraph_id": "para_853" }, { "text": "Mayor Curtatone testified that he made the decision to", "paragraph_id": "para_854" }, { "text": "place DiFronzo on paid leave in response to the District Attorney's", "paragraph_id": "para_855" }, { "text": "Office sending an even more pointed Brady letter after the", "paragraph_id": "para_856" }, { "text": "arbitrator ordered DiFronzo's reinstatement. Thus, as presented", "paragraph_id": "para_857" }, { "text": "by the defendants, the paid-leave evidence showed consistency in", "paragraph_id": "para_858" }, { "text": "Curtatone's conduct, i.e., he acted against DiFronzo each time the", "paragraph_id": "para_859" }, { "text": "District Attorney's Office issued a Brady letter, which suggests", "paragraph_id": "para_860" }, { "text": "that the Brady letter, not retaliatory animus, motivated the", "paragraph_id": "para_861" }, { "text": "termination decision. In this sense, the paid-leave evidence was", "paragraph_id": "para_862" }, { "text": "relevant for the jury to assess motive as it related to the", "paragraph_id": "para_863" }, { "text": "allegation of unlawful termination. The defendants were not", "paragraph_id": "para_864" }, { "text": "- 33 -", "paragraph_id": "para_865" }, { "text": "consenting to consideration of the paid-leave decision as a", "paragraph_id": "para_866" }, { "text": "separate basis for liability by asking Curtatone about his reasons", "paragraph_id": "para_867" }, { "text": "for placing DiFronzo on paid leave. Accordingly, the defendants", "paragraph_id": "para_868" }, { "text": "did not expressly or impliedly consent to trying the paid-leave", "paragraph_id": "para_869" }, { "text": "issue as a basis for damages.", "paragraph_id": "para_870" }, { "text": "That leaves Rule 15(b)(1), which permits the court to", "paragraph_id": "para_871" }, { "text": "allow amendment of the pleadings when a party makes an objection", "paragraph_id": "para_872" }, { "text": "that evidence is not within the issues raised in the pleadings.", "paragraph_id": "para_873" }, { "text": "As mentioned already, the defendants objected at every stage,", "paragraph_id": "para_874" }, { "text": "arguing that DiFronzo should not be allowed to obtain relief based", "paragraph_id": "para_875" }, { "text": "on a factual predicate that he did not plead. For reasons that", "paragraph_id": "para_876" }, { "text": "are not apparent to us, despite the defendants' repeated objections", "paragraph_id": "para_877" }, { "text": "throughout the case, DiFronzo did not seek to amend his complaint", "paragraph_id": "para_878" }, { "text": "at any point to resolve the pleading gap. As we stated already,", "paragraph_id": "para_879" }, { "text": "a court cannot sua sponte amend the pleadings based on a Rule", "paragraph_id": "para_880" }, { "text": "15(b)(1) objection. Supra at 25.", "paragraph_id": "para_881" }, { "text": "DiFronzo's final response is that the defendants'", "paragraph_id": "para_882" }, { "text": "conduct demonstrates that they knew the paid-leave issue was", "paragraph_id": "para_883" }, { "text": "lurking throughout the litigation, and therefore there was no", "paragraph_id": "para_884" }, { "text": "prejudice to Mayor Curtatone by requiring him to answer for his", "paragraph_id": "para_885" }, { "text": "post-arbitration conduct. There are at least two reasons why this", "paragraph_id": "para_886" }, { "text": "argument fails. First, whether there was prejudice is not", "paragraph_id": "para_887" }, { "text": "dispositive. As noted earlier, \"when proper objections have been", "paragraph_id": "para_888" }, { "text": "made but no Rule 15(b) motion has been filed, the lack of prejudice", "paragraph_id": "para_889" }, { "text": "- 34 -", "paragraph_id": "para_890" }, { "text": "to a party does not provide a basis for an amendment.\" Green", "paragraph_id": "para_891" }, { "text": "Country Food Mkt., Inc., 371 F.3d at 1281; see also Kenda Corp. v.", "paragraph_id": "para_892" }, { "text": "Pot O'Gold Money Leagues, Inc., 329 F.3d 216, 232 (1st Cir. 2003)", "paragraph_id": "para_893" }, { "text": "(\"A finding that the nonmoving party would not be prejudiced by an", "paragraph_id": "para_894" }, { "text": "untimely amendment does not compel a determination that the", "paragraph_id": "para_895" }, { "text": "amendment is appropriate.\" (citation modified)).", "paragraph_id": "para_896" }, { "text": "Second, in any event, there was prejudice. The", "paragraph_id": "para_897" }, { "text": "defendants' objections demonstrated that they were trying the case", "paragraph_id": "para_898" }, { "text": "based only on the termination decision. Adopting that strategy,", "paragraph_id": "para_899" }, { "text": "the defendants successfully moved to exclude as irrelevant the", "paragraph_id": "para_900" }, { "text": "testimony of Mayor Ballantyne, the official who replaced Mayor", "paragraph_id": "para_901" }, { "text": "Curtatone a few months after he placed DiFronzo on paid leave.", "paragraph_id": "para_902" }, { "text": "Depending on her testimony, Ballantyne could have provided an", "paragraph_id": "para_903" }, { "text": "intervening, non-retaliatory cause for DiFronzo remaining on paid", "paragraph_id": "para_904" }, { "text": "leave after Curtatone left office, which may have reduced the", "paragraph_id": "para_905" }, { "text": "damages award based on the paid-leave decision. Because DiFronzo", "paragraph_id": "para_906" }, { "text": "did not amend the pleadings to include the paid-leave decision,", "paragraph_id": "para_907" }, { "text": "the defendants did not litigate what happened after Curtatone left", "paragraph_id": "para_908" }, { "text": "office. Had DiFronzo successfully amended the pleadings, the", "paragraph_id": "para_909" }, { "text": "district court likely would have granted the defendants the", "paragraph_id": "para_910" }, { "text": "opportunity to litigate the damages, if any, that arose from the", "paragraph_id": "para_911" }, { "text": "paid-leave decision, which could have included evidence about", "paragraph_id": "para_912" }, { "text": "events after Curtatone's departure. See Fed. R. Civ. P 15(b)(1)", "paragraph_id": "para_913" }, { "text": "- 35 -", "paragraph_id": "para_914" }, { "text": "(stating that the court may grant a continuance to enable the", "paragraph_id": "para_915" }, { "text": "objecting party to address the previously-unpleaded issues).", "paragraph_id": "para_916" }, { "text": "To summarize, the district court correctly observed that", "paragraph_id": "para_917" }, { "text": "\"new developments, or new facts relevant to claims alleged in an", "paragraph_id": "para_918" }, { "text": "original complaint, are routinely adduced through discovery and", "paragraph_id": "para_919" }, { "text": "trial testimony.\" But when those new developments or facts inject", "paragraph_id": "para_920" }, { "text": "an unpleaded \"issue\" into a trial, as they did here, the party", "paragraph_id": "para_921" }, { "text": "relying on the unpleaded issue must satisfy Rule 15(b). Because", "paragraph_id": "para_922" }, { "text": "the defendants did not consent to the unpleaded issue being tried,", "paragraph_id": "para_923" }, { "text": "and DiFronzo did not seek leave to amend his complaint when the", "paragraph_id": "para_924" }, { "text": "defendants objected, DiFronzo failed to satisfy Rule 15(b)'s", "paragraph_id": "para_925" }, { "text": "requirements for presenting an unpleaded issue to the jury.", "paragraph_id": "para_926" }, { "text": "Therefore, the district court erred in permitting the jury to award", "paragraph_id": "para_927" }, { "text": "damages based on the unpleaded paid-leave decision.", "paragraph_id": "para_928" }, { "text": "There is one loose end. The defendants contend that", "paragraph_id": "para_929" }, { "text": "because of the \"cumulative errors,\" the district court should have", "paragraph_id": "para_930" }, { "text": "granted a new trial. But, as is now apparent, there was only one", "paragraph_id": "para_931" }, { "text": "error -- allowing the jury to award damages based on the paid-leave", "paragraph_id": "para_932" }, { "text": "decision. The court, however, asked the jury to award separate", "paragraph_id": "para_933" }, { "text": "damages for the termination and paid-leave decisions. And the", "paragraph_id": "para_934" }, { "text": "defendants have not argued here how allowing the jury to consider", "paragraph_id": "para_935" }, { "text": "the paid-leave decision could have infected the jury's decision to", "paragraph_id": "para_936" }, { "text": "award emotional distress damages for the termination decision. We", "paragraph_id": "para_937" }, { "text": "- 36 -", "paragraph_id": "para_938" }, { "text": "therefore reverse the jury's award only insofar as it awarded", "paragraph_id": "para_939" }, { "text": "damages based on the paid-leave decision.", "paragraph_id": "para_940" }, { "text": "III. CONCLUSION", "paragraph_id": "para_941" }, { "text": "For these reasons, we reverse the judgment for the", "paragraph_id": "para_942" }, { "text": "amounts awarded as lost compensation and emotional distress", "paragraph_id": "para_943" }, { "text": "damages occurring after July 2021. We remand for further", "paragraph_id": "para_944" }, { "text": "proceedings consistent with this opinion. No costs are allocated.", "paragraph_id": "para_945" } ], "word_count": 8038, "cites": [ "373 U.S. 83", "415 U.S. 36", "556 U.S. 662", "92 F.4th 56", "161 F.3d 77", "102 F.4th 508", "133 F.4th 8", "40 F.3d 239", "292 F.3d 90", "570 F.3d 16", "208 F.3d 332", "36 F.3d 154", "179 F.4th 73", "57 F.3d 1168", "918 F.3d 8", "637\nF.3d 1", "783 F.3d 976", "174 F.3d 1150", "371 F.3d 1275", "132 F.4th 1", "652 F.2d 415", "630 F.3d 7", "417 F.3d 201", "896 F.3d 76", "329 F.3d 216" ], "cited_by": [], "sha256": "fe8c9bcfeeafe6743cc1346c59a30117525a3ca313cec58ea8644ef902f20946", "source_url": "https://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/sites/ca1/files/opnfiles/25-1210P-01A.pdf", "fetched_at": "2026-10-01T15:41:18.443+00:00", "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/us/ca1-25-1210-2026-09-21", "risk_graph": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ca1-25-1210-2026-09-21", "relations_graph": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ca1-25-1210-2026-09-21", "changes": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/changes", "agent": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:ca1-25-1210-2026-09-21", "verification": { "stored_sha256": "fe8c9bcfeeafe6743cc1346c59a30117525a3ca313cec58ea8644ef902f20946", "recomputed_sha256": "fe8c9bcfeeafe6743cc1346c59a30117525a3ca313cec58ea8644ef902f20946", "intact": true, "checked_at": "2026-10-04T05:32:18.814Z" } }, "hash": "sha256:b7e258241adc12f421f442920e8e20a6453fd602332f4cf0ee0cfb979fdb8255", "version": "legal-2026-10-04", "expires": "2026-10-05T00:00:00.000Z", "dependency": { "index_version": "legal-2026-10-04+legal-2026-10-04+2026-10-04T05:29:30", "content_hash": "sha256:b7e258241adc12f421f442920e8e20a6453fd602332f4cf0ee0cfb979fdb8255", "revalidate_after": "2026-10-04T06:32:18.980Z", "max_copy_age_seconds": 3600, "policy": "revalidate-required; attribution-preferred", "changelog": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency", "verify": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify", "stale_copy_invalid": true }, "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ca1-25-1210-2026-09-21", "disclaimer": "Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.", "content_notice": { "legal_advice": false, "nature": "Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.", "kinds": { "official_text": "Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted", "summary": "Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text", "classification": "Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer" }, "rule": "Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.", "report_error": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections", "ai_act_declaration": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration" }, "usageInfo": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering" }