Notice: Eighth Circuit Rule 28a(k) Governs Citation of Unpublished Opinions and Provides That They Are Not Precedent and Generally Should Not Be Cited Unless Relevant to Establishing the Doctrines of Res Judicata, Collateral Estoppel, the Law of the Case, or if the Opinion Has Persuasive Value on a Material Issue and No Published Opinion Would Serve As Well.curtis Minter, Jr., Plaintiff-appellant, v. Ford Motor Company, Defendant-appellee, 89 F.3d 841 (8th Cir. 1996)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit - 89 F.3d 841 (8th Cir. 1996) Submitted: June 12, 1996Decided June 19, 1996

Before LOKEN, JOHN R. GIBSON, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.


Curtis Minter, Jr. filed this action alleging claims of employment disability discrimination, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101-12213; and retaliation, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3. The district court1  granted summary judgment to Ford Motor Company, concluding that all of Minter's claims fail as a matter of law and that no genuine issues of material fact exist. Minter appeals.

We have carefully reviewed the record and the arguments presented on appeal. We find no error of law in the district court's grant of summary judgment to Ford Motor Company, and an opinion would have no precedential value. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

 1

The Honorable Paul A. Magnuson, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of Minnesota

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.