Filed: Feb. 11, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-60798 TRAYCEE S. SCOTT, Plaintiff-Appellant, VERSUS CENTURY CELLUNET, JANECE YOUNG, ROBERT BURGESS, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi (1:97-CV-565-RG) February 9, 2000 Before POLITZ and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and RESTANI,* Judge. PER CURIAM:** After reviewing the record and considering the briefs and argument of counsel, we are persuaded that the district court co
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-60798 TRAYCEE S. SCOTT, Plaintiff-Appellant, VERSUS CENTURY CELLUNET, JANECE YOUNG, ROBERT BURGESS, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi (1:97-CV-565-RG) February 9, 2000 Before POLITZ and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and RESTANI,* Judge. PER CURIAM:** After reviewing the record and considering the briefs and argument of counsel, we are persuaded that the district court cor..
More
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-60798 TRAYCEE S. SCOTT, Plaintiff-Appellant, VERSUS CENTURY CELLUNET, JANECE YOUNG, ROBERT BURGESS, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi (1:97-CV-565-RG) February 9, 2000 Before POLITZ and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and RESTANI,* Judge. PER CURIAM:** After reviewing the record and considering the briefs and argument of counsel, we are persuaded that the district court correctly granted summary judgment in this case. Assuming without deciding that the plaintiff established a prima facie case, she produced no summary judgment evidence that tended to refute the non-discriminatory reasons the employer gave for refusing to promote her or tending to show that those reasons were pretextual. On Scott’s disparate wage claim, the employer rectified the seven * Judge, U.S. Court of International Trade, sitting by designation. ** Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. cent per hour disparity as soon as it was called to the employer’s attention and plaintiff established no monetary loss from this disparity. AFFIRMED. 2
