Treda Vance v. Arkansas Department of Human Services

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 13-2522
___________________________
Treda Vance
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
Arkansas Department of Human Services; Sandi Dougherty, individual and official
capacities
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Pine Bluff
____________
Submitted: April 1, 2014
Filed: April 7, 2014
[Unpublished]
____________
Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.

-- 1 of 2 --

Treda Vance appeals from the order of the District Court 1 granting summary
judgment to her employer, the Arkansas Department of Human Services, and an
administrator in her action asserting claims of race discrimination and retaliation.
Following de novo review, we conclude that Vance did not show that retaliation was
a determinative factor in the adverse employment action, and assuming that she
established a prima facie case of race discrimination, she did not meet her obligation
to show that her employer’s proffered reason for its action was pretextual. See Butler
v. Crittenden Cnty., Ark., 708 F.3d 1044, 1048–49 (8th Cir. 2013) (standard of
review); Tyler v. Univ. of Ark. Bd. of Trs., 628 F.3d 980, 985–86 (8th Cir. 2011)
(setting out the framework for proving a claim of employment retaliation); Floyd-
Gimon v. Univ. of Ark. for Med. Scis. ex rel. The Bd. of Trs., 716 F.3d 1141, 1150
(8th Cir. 2013) (explaining that at the pretext stage of a discrimination case, the
plaintiff must show that she was similarly situated to the comparators in all relevant
respects).
Accordingly, we affirm.
______________________________
1The Honorable Brian S. Miller, Chief Judge, United States District Court for
the Eastern District of Arkansas.
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --