Filed: Nov. 12, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 04-1626 _ Vicky M. Wright, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. Nonpareil, an Iowa Corporation, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. * _ Submitted: November 4, 2004 Filed: November 12, 2004 _ Before MURPHY, FAGG, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Vicky Wright applied for an editor position with a newspaper owned by Nonpareil. The managing editor interviewed Wright, but hired
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 04-1626 _ Vicky M. Wright, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. Nonpareil, an Iowa Corporation, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. * _ Submitted: November 4, 2004 Filed: November 12, 2004 _ Before MURPHY, FAGG, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Vicky Wright applied for an editor position with a newspaper owned by Nonpareil. The managing editor interviewed Wright, but hired a..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 04-1626
___________
Vicky M. Wright, *
*
Appellant, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* District of Nebraska.
Nonpareil, an Iowa Corporation, *
* [UNPUBLISHED]
Appellee. *
___________
Submitted: November 4, 2004
Filed: November 12, 2004
___________
Before MURPHY, FAGG, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Vicky Wright applied for an editor position with a newspaper owned by
Nonpareil. The managing editor interviewed Wright, but hired a candidate who,
unlike Wright, had newspaper editing experience and was familiar with the software
used by the paper. Wright brought this 42 U.S.C. § 1981 action, claiming Nonpareil
refused to hire her because of her race. The district court1 granted Nonpareil’s motion
for summary judgment, and Wright appeals.
1
The Honorable Joseph F. Bataillon, United States District Judge for the
District of Nebraska.
Assuming without deciding that Wright established a prima facie case of
discrimination, we agree with the district court that she failed to show Nonpareil’s
articulated nondiscriminatory reason for not hiring her was a pretext for race
discrimination. See Kincaid v. City of Omaha,
378 F.3d 799, 803-06 (8th Cir. 2004).
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
-2-