Dupre v. West Baton Rouge School Board

Fifth Circuit

Dupre v. West Baton Rouge School Board

201 F. App'x 218

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 25, 2006

Docket06-30057

StatusUnpublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 201 F. App'x 218 (Dupre v. West Baton Rouge School Board) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dupre v. West Baton Rouge School Board, 201 F. App'x 218 (5th Cir. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Plaintiff Rosa J. Dupre, a black woman, filed this action under Title VII against the West Baton Rouge Parish School Board, claiming retaliation and discrimination based on race in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3 and § 2000e-2. Dupre alleges that she was the most qualified applicant for the position of assistant principal at Brusly Middle School, but was passed over in favor of a white female because (1) of her race and (2) of her previously-filed discrimination suit. The district court granted the School Board’s motion for summary judgment, finding no disputed issue of material fact on the ultimate questions of discrimination or retaliation. We affirm.

The Magistrate Judge’s report, which was adopted by the district court, found that Dupre had established a prima facie case on both her discrimination and retaliation claims. The report also found, however, that the School Board had successfully rebutted Dupre’s prima facie cases with evidence of a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for promoting Callie Kershaw, a while female, instead of Dupre. The evidence showed that Callie Kershaw was simply more qualified than Dupre, receiving a higher grade from each hiring-committee member, including one member who was a black woman.

Faced with this rebuttal, Dupre failed to offer sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact either (1) that the School Board’s reason was not true, but was instead a pretext for discrimination, or (2) that the School Board’s reason, while true, is only one of the reasons for its conduct, and that another motivating factor was Dupre’s race. Rachid v. Jack in the Box, Inc., 376 F.3d 305, 312 (5th Cir. 2004). The judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM: *

Plaintiff Rosa J. Dupre, a black woman, filed this action under Title VII against the West Baton Rouge Parish School Board, claiming retaliation and discrimination based on race in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3 and § 2000e-2. Dupre alleges that she was the most qualified applicant for the position of assistant principal at Brusly Middle School, but was passed over in favor of a white female because (1) of her race and (2) of her previously-filed discrimination suit. The district court granted the School Board’s motion for summary judgment, finding no disputed issue of material fact on the ultimate questions of discrimination or retaliation. We affirm.

The Magistrate Judge’s report, which was adopted by the district court, found that Dupre had established a prima facie case on both her discrimination and retaliation claims. The report also found, however, that the School Board had successfully rebutted Dupre’s prima facie cases with evidence of a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for promoting Callie Kershaw, a while female, instead of Dupre. The evidence showed that Callie Kershaw was simply more qualified than Dupre, receiving a higher grade from each hiring-committee member, including one member who was a black woman.

Faced with this rebuttal, Dupre failed to offer sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact either (1) that the School Board’s reason was not true, but was instead a pretext for discrimination, or (2) that the School Board’s reason, while true, is only one of the reasons for its conduct, and that another motivating factor was Dupre’s race. Rachid v. Jack in the Box, Inc., 376 F.3d 305, 312 (5th Cir. 2004). The judgment of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

201 F. App'x 218, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dupre-v-west-baton-rouge-school-board-ca5-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack