George Carlisle, Jr. v. City of St. Peters

Eighth Circuit

George Carlisle, Jr. v. City of St. Peters

306 F. App'x 326

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 7, 2009

Docket07-2849

StatusUnpublished

This text of 306 F. App'x 326 (George Carlisle, Jr. v. City of St. Peters) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

George Carlisle, Jr. v. City of St. Peters, 306 F. App'x 326 (8th Cir. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

George W. Carlisle, Jr., appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his employment-discrimination action. Upon careful de novo review, see Jacob-Mua v. Veneman, 289 F.3d 517, 520 (8th Cir.2002), we conclude that summary judgment was properly granted for the reasons stated by the district court. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable Henry E. Autrey, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.

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

PER CURIAM.

George W. Carlisle, Jr., appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his employment-discrimination action. Upon careful de novo review, see Jacob-Mua v. Veneman, 289 F.3d 517, 520 (8th Cir.2002), we conclude that summary judgment was properly granted for the reasons stated by the district court. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable Henry E. Autrey, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

306 F. App'x 326, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/george-carlisle-jr-v-city-of-st-peters-ca8-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack