Plata v. Eureka Locker, Inc.

In action alleging that defendant terminated plaintiff in retaliation for plaintiff-employee’s statement that he was going to file worker’s compensation claim, Dist. Ct. did not err in finding for defendant on ground that plaintiff failed to prove any damages arising out of defendant’s alleged acts. Dist. Ct. had previously precluded pro se plaintiff from presenting any evidence other than his own testimony (due to plaintiff’s prior failure to respond to any of defendant’s discovery requests, as well as his failure to abide by deadlines to identify exhibits and witnesses), and plaintiff further failed to explain at trial how he determined that he had incurred $133,000 in damages, what he had been paid by defendant, or whether wages he had received from subsequent employers had reduced his claimed damages.