Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Jowers v. Tupelo Police Dept, 98-60403 (1998)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 98-60403 Visitors: 13
Filed: Dec. 29, 1998
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit No. 98-60403 Summary Calendar EARLINE JOWERS, Plaintiff-Appellant, VERSUS TUPELO POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi (1:96-CV-347-S-D) December 21, 1998 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Earline Jowers (Jowers) has been employed by the Tupelo Police Department since 1974. In 1991, she was promoted to the position o
More
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit No. 98-60403 Summary Calendar EARLINE JOWERS, Plaintiff-Appellant, VERSUS TUPELO POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi (1:96-CV-347-S-D) December 21, 1998 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Earline Jowers (Jowers) has been employed by the Tupelo Police Department since 1974. In 1991, she was promoted to the position of master sergeant. In August 1995, three openings for lieutenant were posted; but Jowers did not receive a promotion to any of these positions. Jowers filed suit under Title VII and Age * 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 R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. Discrimination and Employment Act alleging that she was discriminated against on the basis of sex or age when she was not selected for promotion. After adequate discovery, the defendant, Tupelo Police Department, moved for summary judgment. The district court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed plaintiff’s cause of action. Jowers timely appealed. We have carefully reviewed the briefs, the reply brief, the record excerpts and relevant portions of the record itself. For the reasons stated by the district court in its opinion filed January 22, 1998, we affirm the order granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment entered on January 22, 1998. AFFIRMED. 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer