Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-02892/USCOURTS-ca8-04-02892-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Linda L. Leonard
Appellant
Scholastic
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Nanette K. Laughery, United States District Judge for the

Western District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-2892

___________

Linda L. Leonard, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Western District of Missouri.

Scholastic, Inc., *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellee. *

___________

Submitted: June 6, 2005

Filed: June 8, 2005

___________

Before MELLOY, McMILLIAN, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Linda Leonard appeals from the district court’s1

 adverse grant of summary

judgment in her claims of age discrimination and retaliation for protected activity.

Upon de novo review, see Evers v. Alliant Techsystems, Inc., 241 F.3d 948, 953 (8th

Cir. 2001) (standard of review), we affirm. 

Specifically, Leonard did not present evidence establishing a prima facie case

of age discrimination or retaliation. See Erenberg v. Methodist Hosp., 357 F.3d 787,

Appellate Case: 04-2892 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/08/2005 Entry ID: 1912902
-2-

793 (8th Cir. 2004) (elements of retaliation prima facie case); Dorsey v. Pinnacle

Automation Co., 278 F.3d 830, 836 (8th Cir. 2002) (age discrimination claims

brought under Missouri Human Rights Act subject to same analysis that controls

claims brought under federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act); Harlston v.

McDonnell Douglas Corp., 37 F.3d 379, 382 (8th Cir. 1994) (elements of age

discrimination prima facie case).

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

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-2892 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/08/2005 Entry ID: 1912902