Filed: Sep. 04, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 06-2570 _ Kathaleen Burnett, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. Nagl Manufacturing, Company, * Norm Fredrickson; June Jones; * [UNPUBLISHED] Richard Keeten, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: August 28, 2007 Filed: September 4, 2007 _ Before MURPHY, SMITH, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Kathaleen Burnett appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgm
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 06-2570 _ Kathaleen Burnett, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. Nagl Manufacturing, Company, * Norm Fredrickson; June Jones; * [UNPUBLISHED] Richard Keeten, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: August 28, 2007 Filed: September 4, 2007 _ Before MURPHY, SMITH, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Kathaleen Burnett appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgme..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 06-2570
___________
Kathaleen Burnett, *
*
Appellant, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* District of Nebraska.
Nagl Manufacturing, Company, *
Norm Fredrickson; June Jones; * [UNPUBLISHED]
Richard Keeten, *
*
Appellees. *
___________
Submitted: August 28, 2007
Filed: September 4, 2007
___________
Before MURPHY, SMITH, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Kathaleen Burnett appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary
judgment in her employment-discrimination action against her former employer, Nagl
Manufacturing Company and others. Having carefully reviewed the record and
considered Burnett’s arguments, we conclude that the district court properly granted
1
The Honorable F.A. Gossett, III, United States Magistrate Judge for the
District of Nebraska, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent
of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
summary judgment and that there is no basis for reversal. See Jacob-Mua v.
Veneman,
289 F.3d 517, 520 (8th Cir. 2002) (de novo standard of review).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We deny Burnett’s pending motions.
______________________________
-2-