Kim Squalls v. Patrick Donahoe, et al

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Kermit E. Bye, Steven M. Colloton and Bobby E. Shepherd (UNPUBLISHED) [4271711] [14-2490]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 14-2490 ___________________________ Kim C. Squalls lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Patrick R. Donahoe, Postmaster General lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee Gina Dudley; Mark H. Anderson; John Doe; Jane Doe lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis ____________ Submitted: April 27, 2015 Filed: May 5, 2015 [Unpublished] ____________ Before BYE, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Appellate Case: 14-2490 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/05/2015 Entry ID: 4271711 Kim Squalls appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in her action asserting claims under Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). Upon careful de novo review, see Torgerson v. City of Rochester, 643 F.3d 1031, 1042, 1049-50 (8th Cir. 2011) (en banc) (standard of review; discussing legal standards), we conclude that the district court did not err in its summary judgment decision, see Gibson v. Am. Greetings Corp., 670 F.3d 844, 852-55 (8th Cir. 2012) (affirming grant of summary judgment in Title VII action; discussing pretext); Rahlf v. Mo-Tech Corp., Inc., 642 F.3d 633, 636-40 (8th Cir. 2011) (affirming grant of summary judgment in ADEA action; discussing pretext). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Rodney W. Sippel, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. -2- Appellate Case: 14-2490 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/05/2015 Entry ID: 4271711

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?