Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Kathy L. Loeckle v. State Farm Mutual, 99-3419 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 99-3419 Visitors: 17
Filed: Apr. 25, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-3419 _ Kathy L. Loeckle, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Northern * District of Iowa. State Farm Mutual Automobile * Insurance Company; State Farm Fire & * [UNPUBLISHED] Casualty Company, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: April 10, 2000 Filed: April 25, 2000 _ Before McMILLIAN and FAGG, Circuit Judges, and ROSENBAUM,* District Judge. _ PER CURIAM. Kathy L. Loeckle appeals the district court's
More
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 99-3419 ___________ Kathy L. Loeckle, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Northern * District of Iowa. State Farm Mutual Automobile * Insurance Company; State Farm Fire & * [UNPUBLISHED] Casualty Company, * * Appellees. * ___________ Submitted: April 10, 2000 Filed: April 25, 2000 ___________ Before McMILLIAN and FAGG, Circuit Judges, and ROSENBAUM,* District Judge. ___________ PER CURIAM. Kathy L. Loeckle appeals the district court's adverse grant of summary judgment on Loeckle's disability and age-based employment discrimination lawsuit. Loeckle contends on appeal that the district court applied the wrong standard in determining Loeckle was an employee of State Farm Fire & Casualty Company and was not an * The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, sitting by designation. employee of State Farm Automobile Insurance Company. Even assuming the district court did not apply the appropriate standard, we see no reversible error because the undisputed evidence presented at summary judgment establishes that Loeckle was an employee only of State Farm Fire & Casualty Company. Because the parties' materials show they are thoroughly familiar with the issues before the court, we also conclude that an extensive discussion is unnecessary. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties' submissions, we believe the district court correctly granted summary judgment. We thus affirm without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT. -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