Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 19 views

    Filed: Patrick Fisher

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant in a case brought by Ersilia E. Yurmann against the Secretary of the Army. Yurmann alleged sex discrimination and retaliation for protected activities based on the Army's failure to promote her. The district court found that Yurmann presented no evidence that the legitimate reasons provided by the Army for promoting another employee instead were a pretext for illegal discrimination. The Court of Appeals reviewed the district court's decision de novo and affirmed for substantially the same reasons as in the district court's memorandum opinion.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Filed: Patrick Fisher

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    19 views3 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant in a case brought by Ersilia E. Yurmann against the Secretary of the Army. Yurmann alleged sex discrimination and retaliation for protected activities based on the Army's failure to promote her. The district court found that Yurmann presented no evidence that the legitimate reasons provided by the Army for promoting another employee instead were a pretext for illegal discrimination. The Court of Appeals reviewed the district court's decision de novo and affirmed for substantially the same reasons as in the district court's memorandum opinion.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1999-05-20 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 98-2163

    Original Title

    Yurmann v. West, 10th Cir. (1999)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant in a case brought by Ersilia E. Yurmann against the Secretary of the Army. Yurmann alleged sex discrimination and retaliation for protected activities based on the Army's failure to promote her. The district court found that Yurmann presented no evidence that the legitimate reasons provided by the Army for promoting another employee instead were a pretext for illegal discrimination. The Court of Appeals reviewed the district court's decision de novo and affirmed for substantially the same reasons as in the district court's memorandum opinion.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    19 views3 pages

    Filed: Patrick Fisher

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant in a case brought by Ersilia E. Yurmann against the Secretary of the Army. Yurmann alleged sex discrimination and retaliation for protected activities based on the Army's failure to promote her. The district court found that Yurmann presented no evidence that the legitimate reasons provided by the Army for promoting another employee instead were a pretext for illegal discrimination. The Court of Appeals reviewed the district court's decision de novo and affirmed for substantially the same reasons as in the district court's memorandum opinion.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    F I L E D

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

    United States Court of Appeals


    Tenth Circuit

    MAY 20 1999

    PATRICK FISHER
    Clerk

    ERSILIA E. YURMANN,
    Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    TOGO WEST, in his official capacity
    as Secretary of the Army,

    No. 98-2163
    (D.C. No. CIV-95-1226-HB)
    (D. N.M.)

    Defendant-Appellee.

    ORDER AND JUDGMENT

    Before PORFILIO , McKAY , and LUCERO , Circuit Judges.

    After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
    unanimously to grant the parties request for a decision on the briefs without oral
    argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is
    therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

    This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
    doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
    generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
    and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

    Plaintiff Ersilia E. Yurmann appeals from the district courts entry of


    summary judgment in favor of defendant on her claims filed under Title VII of the
    Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000e to 2000e-17.
    Appellant is employed by the Department of the Army at White Sands
    Missile Range, New Mexico. She alleged that the Army wrongfully failed to
    promote her based on sex discrimination and retaliation for protected activities.
    The district court granted summary judgment based on its finding that appellant
    presented no evidence to show that the facially legitimate reasons defendant
    produced for promoting another employee were a pretext for illegal
    discrimination.
    The case is expressly narrowed on appeal.

    See Appellants Br. at 8.

    Appellant argues that the district court erred: (1) in finding that she presented no
    evidence of pretext for the employee selection White Sands made; and (2) in
    granting summary judgment on her sex discrimination claim instead of letting that
    claim proceed to trial.
    We review the grant of summary judgment de novo, examining the record
    and the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom in the light most favorable to
    the nonmoving party.

    Templeton v. Neodata Servs., Inc.

    (10th Cir. 1998).


    -2-

    , 162 F.3d 617, 618

    We have carefully reviewed the district courts decision, the parties briefs,
    and the record on appeal. We find no error, and affirm for substantially the same
    reasons as those set forth in the district courts memorandum opinion filed on
    May 5, 1998.
    AFFIRMED.

    Entered for the Court

    John C. Porfilio
    Circuit Judge

    -3-

    You might also like