Case ID: f-appx_560/html/0641-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Cornelius P. BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 13-3282.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: June 9, 2014.
    Filed: June 13, 2014.
    Cornelius P. Brown, Little Rock, AR, pro se.
    Harold Wayne Young, Jr., Friday & El-dredge, Little Rock, AR, for Defendant-Appellee.
    Before GRUENDER, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Cornelius Brown appeals the district court’s adverse grant of summary judgment on his Title VII race-discrimination claims against his former employer, Union Pacific Railroad (UPR), which terminated him in May 2011. After careful review, we agree with the district court that UPR presented a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for terminating Brown — his failure of drug tests, in violation of company policy — and that he did not present any admissible evidence creating a genuine issue as to whether UPR’s stated reason was merely a pretext for unlawful discrimination. See Twymon v. Wells Fargo & Co., 462 F.3d 925, 935 (8th Cir.2006) (this court has consistently held that violating company policy is legitimate, nondiscriminatory rationale for terminating employee); see also Green v. Dormire, 691 F.3d 917, 921 (8th Cir.2012) (grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo). We also agree with the district court’s analysis and conclusions regarding Brown’s allegations that he was denied training and promotions because of his race.

We thus affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 
      
      . The Honorable Billy Roy Wilson, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.