Filed: Jan. 04, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 16-1614 _ Avera Cunningham lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. City of Kansas City, Missouri lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City _ Submitted: December 29, 2016 Filed: January 4, 2017 [Unpublished] _ Before SMITH, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Avera Cunningham appeals after the District Court1 granted summar
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 16-1614 _ Avera Cunningham lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. City of Kansas City, Missouri lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City _ Submitted: December 29, 2016 Filed: January 4, 2017 [Unpublished] _ Before SMITH, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Avera Cunningham appeals after the District Court1 granted summary..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 16-1614
___________________________
Avera Cunningham
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
City of Kansas City, Missouri
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
____________
Submitted: December 29, 2016
Filed: January 4, 2017
[Unpublished]
____________
Before SMITH, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Avera Cunningham appeals after the District Court1 granted summary judgment
to defendants in her action alleging employment discrimination under Title I and Title
1
The Honorable Roseann A. Ketchmark, United States District Court for the
Western District of Missouri.
V of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991.
After de novo review, we find no error in the District Court’s decision. See
Murchison v. Rogers,
779 F.3d 882, 886–87 (8th Cir. 2015) (standard of review).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
______________________________
-2-