Filed: Oct. 10, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 97-60044 (Summary Calendar) _ JANET S THORNTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus GORDON WALKER, Dr, individually and officially; THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE HATTIESBURG PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT, officially; THE HATTIESBURG PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court For the Southern District of Mississippi (2:94-CV-278-PG) September 5, 1997 Before WIENER, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PE
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 97-60044 (Summary Calendar) _ JANET S THORNTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus GORDON WALKER, Dr, individually and officially; THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE HATTIESBURG PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT, officially; THE HATTIESBURG PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court For the Southern District of Mississippi (2:94-CV-278-PG) September 5, 1997 Before WIENER, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER..
More
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FIFTH CIRCUIT
_________________
No. 97-60044
(Summary Calendar)
_________________
JANET S THORNTON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
GORDON WALKER, Dr, individually and
officially; THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
HATTIESBURG PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT,
officially; THE HATTIESBURG PUBLIC SCHOOL
DISTRICT,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Southern District of Mississippi
(2:94-CV-278-PG)
September 5, 1997
Before WIENER, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Janet S. Thornton appeals the district court’s grant of
summary judgment in favor of defendants Gordon Walker, the Board of
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R.
47.5.4.
Trustees of the Hattiesburg Public School District, and the
Hattiesburg Public School District in her action under Title VII of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et
seq., alleging sexual harassment, sexual discrimination, and
retaliation. We agree with the district court that Thornton has
failed to produce any evidence, either direct or indirect, from
which a jury could reasonably infer that defendants’ actions were
motivated by sexually discriminatory animus or that Thornton was
sexually harassed. Furthermore, Thornton has produced no summary
judgment evidence of a causal link between any adverse employment
action against her and activity protected under Title VII. See
Mattern v. Eastman Kodak Co.,
104 F.3d 702, 708 (5th Cir. 1997)
(holding that threats of termination are not “adverse employment
actions” for purposes of Title VII), petition for cert. filed, 66
USLW 3108 (Jul. 21, 1997) (No. 97-126). Therefore, we AFFIRM for
the reasons set forth in the district court’s opinion.
-2-