Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-03-03104/USCOURTS-ca8-03-03104-0/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. 03-3104

___________

Tony J. Brown, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Western District of Arkansas.

Trane Company, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: July 28, 2004

Filed: August 3, 2004

___________

Before MELLOY, LAY, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Following a jury trial, Tony Brown appeals the district court’s1

 adverse grant

of a directed verdict on certain claims in his employment-discrimination action. We

cannot review these rulings, however, because Brown did not provide a trial

transcript. See Fed. R. App. P. 10(b); Pargo v. First Realty Prop. Mgmt., No. 93-

1500, 1994 WL 83267, at *1 (8th Cir. Mar. 16, 1994) (unpublished per curiam) (any

meaningful review of trial court’s factual findings was precluded where appellant

failed to provide transcript after appeals court denied request for transcript at

Appellate Case: 03-3104 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/03/2004 Entry ID: 1795082 
-2-

government expense), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 847 (1994). Further, while Brown

challenges the district court’s refusal to submit a requested jury instruction on

disability, and the court’s refusal to admit into evidence an administrative

determination, his brief contains no argument as to why either ruling was an abuse

of discretion. See Otting v. J.C. Penney Co., 223 F.3d 704, 712-13 (8th Cir. 2000)

(refusal to submit jury instruction is reviewed for abuse of discretion; instruction

defining disability must fairly and adequately submit issue of disability to jury); Doss

v. Frontenac, 14 F.3d 1313, 1318 (8th Cir. 1994) (in employment-discrimination case,

decision whether to admit or exclude administrative findings is properly left to sound

discretion of trial court). Accordingly, we affirm. 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 03-3104 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/03/2004 Entry ID: 1795082