Filed: Aug. 03, 2009
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 07-3473 _ Rosie Hopkins, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the State of Arkansas; Arkansas * Eastern District of Arkansas. Department of Community Correction; * David Guntharp, in his official * [UNPUBLISHED] capacity, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: July 27, 2009 Filed: August 3, 2009 _ Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Rosie Hopkins appeals the district court’s1
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 07-3473 _ Rosie Hopkins, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the State of Arkansas; Arkansas * Eastern District of Arkansas. Department of Community Correction; * David Guntharp, in his official * [UNPUBLISHED] capacity, * * Appellees. * _ Submitted: July 27, 2009 Filed: August 3, 2009 _ Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Rosie Hopkins appeals the district court’s1 ..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 07-3473
___________
Rosie Hopkins, *
*
Appellant, *
*
v. * Appeal from the United States
* District Court for the
State of Arkansas; Arkansas * Eastern District of Arkansas.
Department of Community Correction; *
David Guntharp, in his official * [UNPUBLISHED]
capacity, *
*
Appellees. *
___________
Submitted: July 27, 2009
Filed: August 3, 2009
___________
Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Rosie Hopkins appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment
in her employment-discrimination action. After reviewing the record de novo,
viewing the evidence and all reasonable inferences from it in a light most favorable
to Hopkins, see Jacob-Mua v. Veneman,
289 F.3d 517, 520 (8th Cir. 2002) (standard
1
The Honorable J. Leon Holmes, Chief Judge, United States District Court for
the Eastern District of Arkansas.
of review), we conclude summary judgment was proper for the reasons stated by the
district court. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. See 8th Cir.
R. 47B. Hopkins’s motion to supplement the record on appeal is denied.
______________________________
-2-