Mark Martinez v. U.S. Bank, No. 14-1143 (8th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Civil case - Employment discrimination. Defendant's summary judgment on plaintiff's claim he was terminated based on his national origin in violation of the Iowa Civil Rights Act is affirmed as plaintiff failed to show the legitimate, non-discriminatory reason the defendant offered for his termination was a pretext for unlawful discrimination.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 14-1143 ___________________________ Mark L. Martinez lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. U.S. Bank lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids ____________ Submitted: September 25, 2014 Filed: October 2, 2014 [Unpublished] ____________ Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Mark Martinez appeals from the order of the District Court1 granting summary judgment to his former employer, U.S. Bank (USB), on Martinez s claim that he was terminated based on his national origin in violation of the Iowa Civil Rights Act (ICRA). After careful de novo review, we agree with the District Court that Martinez did not present sufficient evidence demonstrating that the legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for termination proffered by USB was a pretext for unlawful discrimination. See Pulczinski v. Trinity Structural Towers, Inc., 691 F.3d 996, 1002 (8th Cir. 2012) (explaining that the critical inquiry is whether the employer believed in good faith that the employee actually engaged in the conduct for which he was terminated); see also Guimaraes v. SuperValu, Inc., 674 F.3d 962, 971 (8th Cir. 2012) (standard of review); Mercer v. City of Cedar Rapids, 308 F.3d 840, 845 n.2 (8th Cir. 2002) (noting that ICRA is interpreted to mirror Title VII). Accordingly, we affirm. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Jon S. Scoles, United States Magistrate Judge for the Northern District of Iowa, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(c). -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.
