Bankole O. Ogunbamise v. Wellstar Cobb, No. 08-16046 (11th Cir. 2009)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH CIRCUIT JULY 30, 2009 THOMAS K. KAHN CLERK No. 08-16046 D. C. Docket No. 07-02004 CV-WSD-1 BANKOLE O. OGUNBAMISE, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus WELLSTAR COBB HOSPITAL, 2-South, Defendant-Appellee. _______________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia _______________________ (July 30, 2009) Before DUBINA, Chief Judge, TJOFLAT, Circuit Judge, and BOWEN,* District Judge. * Honorable Dudley H. Bowen, Jr., United States District Judge for the Southern District of Georgia, sitting by designation. PER CURIAM: Appellant Bankole Ogunbamise, pro se, appeals the district court s grant of summary judgment to Ogunbamise s former employer, WellStar Health System, Inc. ( WellStar ), in his age discrimination and retaliation suit, filed pursuant to the Age Discrimination and Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. § 623(a)(1), (d) ( ADEA ). We review a court s grant of summary judgment de novo. Cofield v. Goldkist, Inc., 267 F.3d 1264, 1267 (11th Cir. 2001). After reviewing the record, reading the parties briefs, and having the benefit of oral argument, we first conclude that the district court properly granted summary judgment on Ogunbamise s ADEA claim because Ogunbamise did not establish that he was replaced by a younger individual or treated differently than a similarly situated person. As to Ogunbamise s retaliation claim, we conclude from the record that the district court properly found that Ogunbamise failed to present a prima facie case of retaliation because he failed to show a causal connection between his protected activity and the alleged adverse employment actions he suffered. Accordingly, we affirm the district court s grant of summary judgment in favor of WellStar. AFFIRMED. 2

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.