with the trial.    After the close of all the

evidence, the defendants renewed their Rule 50 motions.   The court

took the motions under advisement and submitted the case to the

jury, which was instructed to respond to a set of interrogatories

as part of its deliberations.   By its answers the jury exonerated

McDonald of all alleged wrongdoing.     It also found that the City

did not discriminate against Richardson during his tenure with the

Department. It could not reach a verdict, however, on the question

of whether Richardson's race played a part in the City's refusal to

rehire him.     The district court announced that it would enter

orders on the partial verdict and released the jury.

     Thereafter, in a memorandumnot necessary for

Richardson to show that he and the nonminority applicants who were

rehired gave the same reason or reasons for resigning.            Rather, it

was sufficient for him to show that he belonged to a racial

minority, that he applied for and was qualified for the job and

that after his rejection, the position remained open and the

Department continued to seek qualified applicants.            See supra note
5.

     The district court also decided that Richardson's admission of

"burn out" was a legally acceptable ground for the City's decision,

which was not pretextual.         Richardson urges us to hold that the

evidence relating to pretext