Filed: Apr. 13, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: Case: 14-12652 Date Filed: 04/13/2015 Page: 1 of 3 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 14-12652 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cv-00286-KD-B ERIC MYREE PERKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus KUSHLA WATER DISTRICT, WILLIAM SILVER, ROY KING, JAMES TODD, Defendants-Appellees. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama _ (April 13, 2015) Case: 14-12652 Date Filed: 04/13/2015 Page: 2 of 3 Before M
Summary: Case: 14-12652 Date Filed: 04/13/2015 Page: 1 of 3 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _ No. 14-12652 Non-Argument Calendar _ D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cv-00286-KD-B ERIC MYREE PERKINS, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus KUSHLA WATER DISTRICT, WILLIAM SILVER, ROY KING, JAMES TODD, Defendants-Appellees. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama _ (April 13, 2015) Case: 14-12652 Date Filed: 04/13/2015 Page: 2 of 3 Before MA..
More
Case: 14-12652 Date Filed: 04/13/2015 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 14-12652
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cv-00286-KD-B
ERIC MYREE PERKINS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
KUSHLA WATER DISTRICT,
WILLIAM SILVER,
ROY KING,
JAMES TODD,
Defendants-Appellees.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Alabama
________________________
(April 13, 2015)
Case: 14-12652 Date Filed: 04/13/2015 Page: 2 of 3
Before MARCUS, WILLIAM PRYOR, and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Eric Perkins, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s grant of
summary judgment for Kushla Water District (“KWD”), William Silver, Roy
King, and James Todd (“the defendants”), on his claims that the defendants
discriminated against him on the basis of his race (African-American), maintained
a hostile work environment, retaliated against him for filing a discrimination
charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and constructively
discharged him, in violation of Title VI, Title VII, § 1981, and § 1983.
Briefly stated, the appeal presents two issues:
1. Whether Perkins’s causes of action are vested in his bankruptcy estate so
that he lacks standing to bring this appeal; and
2. Whether, in determining that Perkins failed to create a triable issue on his
discrimination and retaliation claims, the district court erroneously viewed the
evidence in the light most favorable to the defendants.
First, because the instant causes of action arose after Perkins filed for
bankruptcy, the action did not become part of his bankruptcy estate; and his
bankruptcy proceeding had no effect on his standing in the district court or on
2
Case: 14-12652 Date Filed: 04/13/2015 Page: 3 of 3
appeal. Second, contrary to Perkins’s contentions, the district court viewed the
evidence in the light most favorable to him; but that court nonetheless concluded
that he failed -- as a matter of law -- to establish a triable issue for his
discrimination or retaliation claims. On appeal, Perkins has not challenged the
district court’s legal standards, although he does quarrel about some immaterial
facts. The district court mainly concluded that the evidence failed to show
sufficient adverse employment acts or to show white employees were treated
differently and better. Because Perkins has failed to point to a reversible error on
the part of the district court, we affirm the grant of summary judgment for the
defendants on all of his claims.
AFFIRMED.
3