Filed: Jan. 26, 2007
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 06-3053 _ Scherry Riggins, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Eastern * District of Arkansas. * Pulaski Bank and Trust Company, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * _ Submitted: January 12, 2007 Filed: January 26, 2007 _ Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, BYE and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Scherry Riggins appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in her employment discriminat
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 06-3053 _ Scherry Riggins, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Eastern * District of Arkansas. * Pulaski Bank and Trust Company, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * _ Submitted: January 12, 2007 Filed: January 26, 2007 _ Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, BYE and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Scherry Riggins appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in her employment discriminati..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 06-3053
___________
Scherry Riggins, *
*
Appellant, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the Eastern
* District of Arkansas.
*
Pulaski Bank and Trust Company, * [UNPUBLISHED]
*
Appellee. *
___________
Submitted: January 12, 2007
Filed: January 26, 2007
___________
Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, BYE and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Scherry Riggins appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of summary
judgment in her employment discrimination and retaliation suit against her former
employer, Pulaski Bank and Trust Company. Having carefully reviewed the record,
see Kincaid v. City of Omaha,
378 F.3d 799, 803-04 (8th Cir. 2004) (de novo standard
of review), we agree with the district court that Riggins failed to establish that Pulaski
Bank’s proffered legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for her termination were
1
The Honorable Susan Webber Wright, United States District Judge for the
Eastern District of Arkansas.
pretextual. See Gilooly v. Mo. Dep’t of Health & Senior Servs.,
421 F.3d 734, 739
(8th Cir. 2005) (burden-shifting analysis).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
-2-