Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca11-14-12652/USCOURTS-ca11-14-12652-0/pdf.json

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

---

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 14-12652

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 1:13-cv-00286-KD-B

ERIC MYREE PERKINS, 

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

 versus

KUSHLA WATER DISTRICT, 

WILLIAM SILVER, 

ROY KING, 

JAMES TODD, 

 Defendants-Appellees.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Alabama

________________________

 (April 13, 2015) 

USCA11 Case: 14-12652 Date Filed: 04/13/2015 Page: 1 of 3
2

Before MARCUS, WILLIAM PRYOR, and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

Eric Perkins, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s grant of 

summary judgment for Kushla Water District (“KWD”), William Silver, Roy 

King, and James Todd (“the defendants”), on his claims that the defendants 

discriminated against him on the basis of his race (African-American), maintained 

a hostile work environment, retaliated against him for filing a discrimination 

charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and constructively 

discharged him, in violation of Title VI, Title VII, § 1981, and § 1983.

Briefly stated, the appeal presents two issues:

1. Whether Perkins’s causes of action are vested in his bankruptcy estate so 

that he lacks standing to bring this appeal; and

2. Whether, in determining that Perkins failed to create a triable issue on his 

discrimination and retaliation claims, the district court erroneously viewed the 

evidence in the light most favorable to the defendants.

First, because the instant causes of action arose after Perkins filed for 

bankruptcy, the action did not become part of his bankruptcy estate; and his 

bankruptcy proceeding had no effect on his standing in the district court or on 

USCA11 Case: 14-12652 Date Filed: 04/13/2015 Page: 2 of 3
3

appeal. Second, contrary to Perkins’s contentions, the district court viewed the 

evidence in the light most favorable to him; but that court nonetheless concluded 

that he failed -- as a matter of law -- to establish a triable issue for his 

discrimination or retaliation claims. On appeal, Perkins has not challenged the 

district court’s legal standards, although he does quarrel about some immaterial 

facts. The district court mainly concluded that the evidence failed to show 

sufficient adverse employment acts or to show white employees were treated 

differently and better. Because Perkins has failed to point to a reversible error on 

the part of the district court, we affirm the grant of summary judgment for the 

defendants on all of his claims.

AFFIRMED.

USCA11 Case: 14-12652 Date Filed: 04/13/2015 Page: 3 of 3