Filed: Jun. 08, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-60348 Summary Calendar QUINTIN L. MILTON Plaintiff-Appellant, versus JACKSON PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, Jackson Division District Court No. 3:98-CV-467 June 8, 2000 Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Quintin Milton sued his former employer, the Jackson Public School District, alleging he was discharged bas
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-60348 Summary Calendar QUINTIN L. MILTON Plaintiff-Appellant, versus JACKSON PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, Jackson Division District Court No. 3:98-CV-467 June 8, 2000 Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Quintin Milton sued his former employer, the Jackson Public School District, alleging he was discharged base..
More
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-60348
Summary Calendar
QUINTIN L. MILTON
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
JACKSON PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Mississippi, Jackson Division
District Court No. 3:98-CV-467
June 8, 2000
Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Quintin Milton sued his former employer, the Jackson Public
School District, alleging he was discharged based on his national origin
in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C.A. §2000e et seq., and 42 U.S.C.A.
§1981. Milton also asserted state law claims of negligent and
intentional infliction of emotional distress. The district court
granted summary judgment in favor of Jackson Public Schools with regard
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this
opinion should not be published and is not precedent except for the limited
circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
to Milton’s federal discrimination claims and declined to exercise
pendent jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims.
Having reviewed the parties’ briefs, the district court’s
comprehensive opinion, and pertinent sections of the record, this Court
agrees that Milton was neither able to establish a prima facie case of
discrimination nor adduce sufficient evidence to support a reasonable
inference that national origin was a determinative factor in his
termination. This Court therefore affirms for essentially the same
reasons stated by the district court.
AFFIRMED.
2