Bettye Everette v. St. Vincent Health System, No. 09-1577 (8th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Civil case - Employment discrimination. Defendant's summary judgment affirmed without comment.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 09-1577 ___________ Bettye Everette, Appellant, v. St. Vincent Health System, Appellee. * * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * ___________ Submitted: February 19, 2010 Filed: February 24, 2010 ___________ Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Bettye Everette, an African American female, appeals the district court s1 adverse grant of summary judgment in her Title VII employment discrimination action against St. Vincent Health System. Reviewing de novo, see Johnson v. Blaukat, 453 F.3d 1108, 1112 (8th Cir. 2006), we find no error in the district court s decision, see 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000e-5(e)(1) (charges must be filed within 180 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice); Klein v. McGowan, 198 F.3d 705, 709 (8th Cir. 1999) (conduct which occurred outside of the statutory period cannot be grounds for 1 The Honorable James M. Moody, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. suit unless it is part of continuing violation which is systematic or serial; for continuing-violation exception to be available, plaintiff must show sufficient nexus between time-barred instances of harassment and discrimination that was not timebarred); see also Anda v. Wickes Furniture Co., 517 F.3d 526, 531-32 (8th Cir. 2008) (listing elements of prima facie case for hostile work environment claim); Carpenter v. Con-Way Cent. Express, Inc., 481 F.3d 611, 618 (8th Cir. 2007) ( A hostile work environment is permeated with discriminatory intimidation, ridicule, and insult that is sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of the victim s employment and create an abusive working environment as viewed objectively by a reasonable person. (quoting Tademe v. Saint Cloud State Univ., 328 F.3d 982, 991 (8th Cir. 2003))). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ -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.
