| Keyword |
Date: Filed /
STATES COURT OF APPEALS
ORDER AND JUDGMENT(*)
Before MURPHY, SEYMOUR, and McCONNELL, Circuit Judges.
Plaintiff-Appellant Donald L. Nicely, an employee of the Defense
Commissary Agency at McConnell Air Force Base, filed this lawsuit, pro se,
alleging that he was subjected to unequal terms and conditions of employment on
account of his race (Caucasian). He alleges a variety of racially motivated
indignities, including being forced to sit at a meeting when others stood, being
given the wrong set of keys, being greeted with the "black power" salute,
experiencing delays in receiving a personal code, receiving emails through an
assistant rather than directly, receiving training that was flawed in various
respects, and being followed around the store. The district court granted
summary judgment, ruling as a matter of law that the Plaintiffs' allegations did
not constitute "adverse employment actions" within the meaning of Title VII or
rise to the level of a hostile work environment.
In his brief in this Court, which we construe liberally, Plaintiff argues that
the district court made false statements of fact and that the Defendants provided
false statements and affidavits and withheld evidence.
We have carefully examined the Memorandum and Order issued by the
district court in light of Plaintiff's contentions, and conclude that the court based
its judgment on the allegations in Plaintiff's own complaint. Any discrepancies in
the description of the facts were minor and could not have affected the outcome
of the case.
The judgment of the United States District Court for the District of
Kansas is therefore AFFIRMED.
Entered for the Court,
Michael W. McConnell
Click footnote number to return to corresponding location in the text.
*.After examining the briefs and appellate
record, this panel has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination
of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). This case is
therefore 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 This order and judgment is not
binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and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.
| Keyword |
Date: Filed /
Comments to: WebMaster,
ca10 [at] washburnlaw.edu.
Updated: April 17, 2006.
HTML markup © 2006, Washburn University School of Law.