Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-03365/USCOURTS-ca8-05-03365-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 

---

1

The Honorable Robert T. Dawson, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Arkansas.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-3365

___________

Evon Gills, *

*

Appellant, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

Department of Community Correction * Western District of Arkansas.

Adult Probation and Parole Offices; *

Steve Arnold, Field Administrator; * [UNPUBLISHED]

Anita Efird, Area Supervisor; Richard *

Longinotti, Office Supervisor, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: December 20, 2006 

Filed: December 27, 2006 

___________

Before RILEY, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Evon Gills (Gills) appeals the district court’s1

 adverse grant of summary

judgment in her suit alleging gender discrimination and retaliation, in violation of

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and discrimination on the

Appellate Case: 05-3365 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/27/2006 Entry ID: 3263003
-2-

basis of disability, in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C.

§§ 12101 et seq., respectively.

Having conducted a de novo review of the record, see Kratzer v. Rockwell

Collins, Inc., 398 F.3d 1040, 1043 (8th Cir. 2005), we agree with the district court’s

conclusion Gills failed to establish a prima facie case, her employer set forth

legitimate non-discriminatory reasons for Gills’s discharge, and there is no indication

her employer’s reasons were pretextual. We also reject Gills’s argument the district

court improperly weighed the evidence or determined credibility, and we decline to

consider her arguments raised for the first time on appeal.

Because we conclude an extended opinion would have no precedential value

and no error of law appears, we affirm the well-reasoned opinion of the district court.

See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-3365 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/27/2006 Entry ID: 3263003