Mary Anderson v. Arkansas Dept. of Human Svcs.

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Diana E. Murphy, Pasco M. Bowman and Bobby E. Shepherd (UNPUBLISHED) [4247751] [14-2404]

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 14-2404
___________________________
Mary Catherine Anderson
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
Arkansas Department of Human Services, DCFS
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock
____________
Submitted: February 4, 2015
Filed: February 25, 2015
[Unpublished]
____________
Before MURPHY, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Mary Anderson appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary
judgment in her action asserting claims under Title VII and the Family and Medical
1

The Honorable Brian S. Miller, Chief Judge, United States District Court for
the Eastern District of Arkansas.

Appellate Case: 14-2404

Page: 1

Date Filed: 02/25/2015 Entry ID: 4247751

Leave Act. Upon careful de novo review, we conclude that the district court did not
err in its summary judgment decision. See Torgerson v. City of Rochester, 643 F.3d
1031, 1042, 1046 (8th Cir. 2011) (en banc) (de novo review of grant of summary
judgment; for Title VII discrimination claim, ultimate burden falls on plaintiff to
produce sufficient evidence to create genuine issue of material fact regarding whether
employer’s proffered nondiscriminatory justifications are mere pretext for intentional
discrimination); see also Pulczinski v. Trinity Structural Towers, Inc., 691 F.3d 996,
1007 (8th Cir. 2012) (Family and Medical Leave Act discrimination claim requires
showing that employee’s exercise of rights under Act played part in employer’s
adverse decision).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________

-2-

Appellate Case: 14-2404

Page: 2

Date Filed: 02/25/2015 Entry ID: 4247751