Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Allen Lee Lampkin v. Stroman's, 00-2577 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 00-2577 Visitors: 33
Filed: Jan. 18, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 00-2577 _ Allen Lee Lampkin, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. Stroman’s, Inc., * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. * _ Submitted: January 12, 2001 Filed: January 18, 2001 _ Before BOWMAN, BEAM, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Allen Lampkin appeals from the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his employment discrimination lawsuit against his f
More
                     United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                     ___________

                                     No. 00-2577
                                     ___________

Allen Lee Lampkin,                        *
                                          *
             Appellant,                   *
                                          * Appeal from the United States
      v.                                  * District Court for the
                                          * Eastern District of Arkansas.
Stroman’s, Inc.,                          *
                                          *      [UNPUBLISHED]
             Appellee.                    *
                                     ___________

                           Submitted: January 12, 2001
                               Filed: January 18, 2001
                                   ___________

Before BOWMAN, BEAM, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.
                          ___________

PER CURIAM.

       Allen Lampkin appeals from the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary
judgment in his employment discrimination lawsuit against his former employer. Upon
de novo review, we agree with the district court, for the reasons expressed in its order,
that Lampkin failed to demonstrate Stroman’s stated reasons for his termination were
a pretext for discrimination, or Stroman’s engaged in retaliatory behavior. See Whitley
v. Peer Review Systems, Inc., 
221 F.3d 1053
, 1055 (8th Cir. 2000).


      1
        The Honorable G. Thomas Eisele, United States District Judge for the Eastern
District of Arkansas.
      Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We deny Stroman’s pending
motions on appeal.

     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