Court Opinion

ID: 2736366
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2014-09-24 15:01:19.414673+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:03:39.579157
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                            For the Eighth Circuit
                        ___________________________

                                No. 14-1633
                        ___________________________

                                  Robert L. Bland

                       lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant

                                           v.

                                  O.P. & C.M.I.A.

                      lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee
                                     ____________

                     Appeal from United States District Court
                for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
                                 ____________

                         Submitted: September 18, 2014
                           Filed: September 24, 2014
                                 [Unpublished]
                                 ____________

Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
                          ____________

PER CURIAM.

    Robert L. Bland appeals the district court's1 order denying his motion for
summary judgment and granting summary judgment for O.P. & C.M.I.A. (the union).

      1
       The Honorable Scott O. Wright, United States District Judge for the Western
District of Missouri.
After de novo review, see Torgerson v. City of Rochester, 643 F.3d 1031, 1042-43
(8th Cir. 2011) (en banc), we affirm. We conclude that summary judgment for the
union was appropriate. As Bland failed to produce evidence that the union referred
union members outside the protected class for work during the time in question, he
failed to support his Title VII claim that the union "fail[ed] or refuse[d] to refer [him]
for employment" on account of his race. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(c)(2); c.f. Jackson v.
United Parcel Serv., Inc., 643 F.3d 1081, 1086 (8th Cir. 2011).

      Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
                      ______________________________

                                           -2-