Filed: Jul. 24, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 17-2931 _ Sharon L. Meeks lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant v. Department of Human Services lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock _ Submitted: July 19, 2018 Filed: July 24, 2018 [Unpublished] _ Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Sharon Meeks appeals from the order of the District Court1 granting sum
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 17-2931 _ Sharon L. Meeks lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant v. Department of Human Services lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock _ Submitted: July 19, 2018 Filed: July 24, 2018 [Unpublished] _ Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Sharon Meeks appeals from the order of the District Court1 granting summ..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 17-2931
___________________________
Sharon L. Meeks
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant
v.
Department of Human Services
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock
____________
Submitted: July 19, 2018
Filed: July 24, 2018
[Unpublished]
____________
Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Sharon Meeks appeals from the order of the District Court1 granting summary
judgment to her former employer the Arkansas Department of Human Services in her
1
The Honorable Kristine G. Baker, United States District Judge for the Eastern
District of Arkansas.
Title VII retaliation action. After de novo review, we conclude that the District Court
did not err. See Hutton v. Maynard,
812 F.3d 679, 683–84 (8th Cir. 2016) (setting
forth the evidence necessary to survive a motion for summary judgment on a Title VII
retaliation claim); see also Conolly v. Clark,
457 F.3d 872, 876 (8th Cir. 2006) (“[A]
properly supported motion for summary judgment is not defeated by self-serving
affidavits.”).
We affirm the judgment of the District Court.
______________________________
-2-