Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-03-02565/USCOURTS-ca8-03-02565-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jack Combs
Appellant
R.R. Donnelley & Sons Company
Appellee

Document Text:

*

The Honorable Richard W. Goldberg, Judge of the United States Court of

International Trade, sitting by designation.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 03-2565

___________

Jack Combs, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the District

* of Minnesota.

R. R. Donnelley & Sons Company, *

doing business as Parcel Shippers * [UNPUBLISHED]

Express, Inc., *

*

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: May 10, 2004

Filed: May 17, 2004

___________

Before MURPHY and FAGG, Circuit Judges, and GOLDBERG,*

 Judge of the United

States Court of International Trade.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Jack Combs worked as a truck driver for R.R. Donnelley & Sons Company.

In June 2001, the dispatcher informed Combs he would be operating a dump truck the

next week. Combs refused, stating he did not feel comfortable doing so, and the

Appellate Case: 03-2565 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/17/2004 Entry ID: 1767683 
**The Honorable Ann C. Montgomery, United States District Judge for the

District of Minnesota. 

-2-

dispatcher terminated him, stating he was “tired of his attitude.” The dispatcher also

claimed he fired Combs because he had a history of late deliveries. Combs brought

this lawsuit against R.R. Donnelley for retaliation, stating he was fired for refusing

to violate a regulation that required him to have experience and training he lacked.

Combs also brought a defamation claim based on the filing of a termination form

temporarily containing an incorrect statement that Combs had engaged in

unauthorized use of company funds.

The district court** granted summary judgment for R.R. Donnelley concluding

Combs failed to establish a prima facie case of retaliation. The court found it was

undisputed that Combs did not inform the dispatcher he did not want to drive the

dump truck because he would be violating a regulation, and thus, Combs failed to

generate a genuine issue of material fact on whether his protected activity caused his

termination. See Kunferman v. Ford Motor Co., 112 F.3d 962, 965 (8th Cir. 1997)

(applying Minnesota law). Regarding the defamation claim, the court found no

evidence of harm from the temporarily incorrect termination form. 

On appeal, Combs argues there was a genuine issue of material fact on his

retaliation claim because his statement to R.R. Donnelley that he would “call up [the]

DOT” sufficiently articulates his good faith belief that his operation of the dump

truck would violate federal DOT regulations. Viewing the statement in the light most

favorable to Combs, we conclude the statement is too vague to put R.R. Donnelley

on notice that Combs believed his operation of the dump truck violated the law.

Thus, the district court properly granted summary judgment on Combs’s retaliation

claim. 

Appellate Case: 03-2565 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/17/2004 Entry ID: 1767683 
-3-

Combs also contends the district court should not have granted summary

judgment on his defamation claim. Combs argues the termination notice was not

protected by a qualified privilege because R.R. Donnelley failed to conduct an

investigation. We agree with the district court that Combs’s defamation claim fails

as a matter of law because he presented no evidence that the termination notice

harmed his reputation or lowered him in the estimation of the community. See

Kuechle v. Life’s Companion P.C.A., 653 N.W.2d 314, 218 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002).

Indeed, Combs does not argue otherwise. 

We thus affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment to R.R.

Donnelley. 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 03-2565 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/17/2004 Entry ID: 1767683