Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-03627/USCOURTS-ca8-05-03627-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Marion J. Arnett
Appellant
R. L. Brownlee
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable J. Leon Holmes, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

the Eastern District of Arkansas.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-3627

___________

Marion J. Arnett, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Arkansas.

R. L. Brownlee, Acting Secretary, *

United States Department of the Army, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: November 27, 2006

Filed: December 1, 2006

___________

Before RILEY, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Marion Arnett appeals the district court’s1

 adverse grant of summary judgment

in his employment-discrimination action. Having carefully reviewed the record, see

Kasper v. Federated Mut. Ins. Co., 425 F.3d 496, 502 (8th Cir. 2005) (de novo

review), we agree with the district court that Arnett offered no evidence that his

supervisors knew of his disability before they made the decision to terminate him.

Thus, he cannot establish a prima facie case of discrimination based on his disability.

Appellate Case: 05-3627 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/01/2006 Entry ID: 2114345
-2-

See Wilking v. County of Ramsey, 153 F.3d 869, 871-74 (8th Cir. 1998) (elements

of prima facie case;summary judgment for employer was appropriate where, prior to

awareness of employee’s depression, employer had decided to terminate probationary

employee based on poor performance and only question was when discharge would

occur). We also agree with the district court that Arnett’s reasonable-accommodation

claim fails for the same reason. See Mole v. Buckhorn Rubber Prods., Inc., 165 F.3d

1212, 1218 (8th Cir. 1999) (upholding summary judgment for employer where prior

to receiving notice of termination, employee never advised employer she needed

additional accommodation). 

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-3627 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/01/2006 Entry ID: 2114345