Eddie Wyatt v. J. B. Hunt Transport, No. 09-2267 (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. 09-2267 ___________ Eddie R. Wyatt, Appellant, v. J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc., Appellee. * * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * ___________ Submitted: February 23, 2010 Filed: February 25, 2010 ___________ Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Eddie Wyatt appeals the District Court's1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his action alleging that J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc., terminated him as a commercial truck driver in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 12213, and Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations, 49 C.F.R. § 382.121. After careful de novo review, we find no error in the district court s grant of summary judgment. Johnson v. Blaukat, 453 F.3d 1108, 1112 (8th Cir. 2006) (standard of review); 49 C.F.R. § 391.41(b)(13) ("A person is physically qualified to 1 The Honorable James M. Moody, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. drive a commercial motor vehicle if that person . . . [h]as no current clinical diagnosis of alcoholism."); Huber v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 486 F.3d 480, 482 (8th Cir. 2007) (noting that to make a prima facie case in a reasonable-accommodation claim under the ADA, a plaintiff must show, inter alia, that he is a qualified individual); Williams v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 527 F.3d 1135, 1137 (10th Cir. 2008) (noting that DOT regulations requiring drug and alcohol testing for safety-sensitive positions in transportation industries do not provide for a "private cause of action . . . to aggrieved employees for a violation of the procedural protections"). Accordingly, we affirm. ______________________________ -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.
