Filed: Oct. 04, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-1626 _ Ramona Einfalt, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. William Henderson, Postmaster * General, United States Postal Service, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * _ Submitted: October 1, 1999 Filed: October 4, 1999 _ Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. In this employment discrimination action, Ramona Einfalt appeals the district co
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-1626 _ Ramona Einfalt, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. William Henderson, Postmaster * General, United States Postal Service, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * _ Submitted: October 1, 1999 Filed: October 4, 1999 _ Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. In this employment discrimination action, Ramona Einfalt appeals the district cou..
More
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 99-1626 ___________ Ramona Einfalt, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. William Henderson, Postmaster * General, United States Postal Service, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * ___________ Submitted: October 1, 1999 Filed: October 4, 1999 ___________ Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. In this employment discrimination action, Ramona Einfalt appeals the district court&s1 grant of summary judgment in favor of her employer. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties& submissions, we conclude that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment, because Einfalt failed to show that USPS&s reasons were pretextual and that the actual reason she was not promoted was age 1 The HONORABLE JOSEPH F. BATAILLON, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska. discrimination. Further, Einfalt failed to establish a cause of action for retaliation. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT. -2-
