Leon Fowler v. Steven Howell


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: BOBBY E. SHEPHERD, KERMIT E. BYE and MORRIS S. ARNOLD (UNPUBLISHED); denying [3753339-2] motion for appointment of counsel and all other pending motions filed by Mr. Leon Fowler. [3782736] [10-3069]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 10-3069 ___________ Leon Fowler, Appellant, v. Steven Howell, Appellee. * * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Western * District of Missouri. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * ___________ Submitted: April 19, 2011 Filed: May 2, 2011 ___________ Before BYE, ARNOLD, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. In this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, Missouri inmate Leon Fowler appeals from the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment on his claims asserting that he was terminated from a prison job, and was not hired for other prison jobs, in violation of his equal protection and due process rights. After careful de novo review, see Chism v. Curtner, 619 F.3d 979, 982 (8th Cir. 2010), we conclude that summary judgment was properly granted on Fowler’s equal 1 The Honorable Greg Kays, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. Appellate Case: 10-3069 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/02/2011 Entry ID: 3782736 protection claim because Fowler did not establish a prima facie case of racial discrimination, and also did not establish a genuine dispute as to whether defendant’s legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for the challenged decisions were pretextual, see id. at 983 & n.3 (summarizing burden-shifting framework set forth in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973), which applies to race discrimination claims in absence of direct evidence of discrimination; noting that such claims under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983 are all analyzed under same framework); Lewis v. Jacks, 486 F.3d 1025, 1028 (8th Cir. 2007) (to avoid summary judgment on race discrimination claim, inmate had to identify affirmative evidence from which jury could find proof of discriminatory motive; motive is most often proved with evidence that similarly situated inmates were treated differently). We also conclude that summary judgment was properly granted on Fowler’s due process claim. See Lyon v. Farrier, 727 F.2d 766, 769 (8th Cir. 1984) (per curiam) (inmates generally have no constitutional right to tenure in prison jobs; concluding that prison regulations did not create liberty or property interest). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment, see 8th Cir. R. 47B, and we deny Fowler’s pending motion. ______________________________ -2- Appellate Case: 10-3069 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/02/2011 Entry ID: 3782736

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?