United States Eighth Circuit

In an employment discrimination action brought by a professor, district court judgment is affirmed where: 1) plaintiff's argument that the final decision maker on her tenure application was a "cat's paw" to carry out a discriminatory motive fails, as there was no evidence that the Board of Regents served as a conduit, vehicle or rubber stamp by which others at the school carried out their unlawful design; 2) the court did not err in its McDonnell Douglas analysis, as defendants offered legitimate, non-discriminatory grounds for the decision not to offer plaintiff tenure, which plaintiff failed to show were pretexts for discrimination based on her national-origin, religion and pregnancy; and 3) procedural irregularities in her tenure review were not sufficient to show that the stated reasons for denying tenure were pretextual.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/01/2009
• Published 06/01/2009

Judges

• MELLOY, Circuit Judge., Before MELLOY, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Eighth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Ann Marie Holden-Kendall, argued, James Harold Gilliam, Elizabeth A. Coonan, on the brief, Des Moines, IA, for appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• David S. Gorham, argued, Des Moines, IA, for appellee