Dotson v. Delta Consolidation Industries
| Decision Date | 16 February 2001 |
| Docket Number | No. 00-2484,00-2484 |
| Citation | 251 F.3d 780 |
| Parties | (8th Cir. 2001) HAROLD DOTSON, APPELLANT, v. DELTA CONSOLIDATED INDUSTRIES, INC., APPELLEE. Submitted: |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
Before Wollman, Chief Judge, and Bright and Morris Sheppard Arnold, Circuit Judges.
Harold Dotson, a black man, was a material handler in the shipping department of Delta Consolidated Industries, Inc., when his group leader resigned, creating an opening for a group leader. Matthew Vaughn, a white co-worker of Mr. Dotson, applied for and received the position.
Mr. Dotson subsequently sued Delta under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, see 42 U.S.C. 2000e through 2000e-17, alleging race discrimination. The district court 1 granted summary judgment to Delta, and Mr. Dotson appealed. We affirm the judgment of the district court.
To establish a submissible failure-to-promote case under Title VII, Mr. Dotson must first make a prima facie case, that is, he must show that he is a member of a protected group, that he was qualified for and applied for a promotion for an available position, and that he was rejected for that position. He must also prove that a similarly situated employee, outside the protected group, was promoted instead. See Rose-Maston v. NME Hospitals, Inc., 133 F.3d 1104, 1109 (8th Cir. 1998).
We hold that Mr. Dotson failed to establish a prima facie case. In particular, he did not show that he applied for a promotion for an available position and was rejected, because, on the present record, no reasonable fact finder could conclude that he ever submitted an application to Delta for the group leader's position, or ever indicated to anyone in Delta's management that he wanted the job. In his deposition, Mr. Dotson testified that he was waiting for Delta to post a notice of the opening for a group leader before he applied for it. He also stated that he "may" have talked to some of his supervisors about the situation, but he admitted that he asked them only general questions regarding Delta's plans for filling the vacant position and did not mention to any of them that he wanted a chance to apply for the job.
Despite his deposition testimony, Mr. Dotson disputes the facts that he did not apply for the opening for a group leader and that he never informed Delta's management of his interest in the job. He points to an affidavit that he filed in the district court that stated that he discussed the job opening with his supervisors and asked to be considered for it. Because this account of what happened differed from Delta's account, Mr. Dotson maintains that a question of material fact existed that precluded the district court from granting summary judgment to Delta. We reject this contention, because we have held many times that a party may not create a question of material fact, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Clinton v. Garrett
...the summary judgment motion." Clay v. Lafarge N. Am., 985 F. Supp. 2d 1009, 1021 (S.D. Iowa 2013) (citing Dotson v. Delta Consol. Indus., Inc., 251 F.3d 780, 781 (8th Cir. 2001) ). Here, the Court did not rely on the contested affidavits in its analysis of the merits above, as they were imm......
-
Helm Financial Corp. v. Iowa Northern Ry. Co.
...and quotation marks omitted). Bass v. City of Sioux Falls, 232 F.3d 615, 619 (8th Cir.1999); accord Dotson v. Delta Consolidated Indus., Inc., 251 F.3d 780, 781 (8th Cir.2001) ("We have held many times that a party may not create a question of material fact, and thus forestall summary judgm......
-
Hennick v. Schwans Sales Enterprises, Inc., C 00-3024-MWB.
...rejected, Schwans continued to seek, hire, train, or promote male applicants to fill the position. See, e.g., Dotson v. Delta Consol. Indus., Inc., 251 F.3d 780, 781 (8th Cir.2001) ("To establish a submissible failure-to-promote case under Title VII, [the plaintiff] must first make a prima ......
-
Clay v. American
...the Court can consider and dispose of any unsupported facts when considering the summary judgment motion. See Dotson v. Delta Consol. Indus., Inc., 251 F.3d 780, 781 (8th Cir.2001) (noting that the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has “held many times that a party may not create a question o......
-
Section 10.19 1. Inconsistent Affidavits
...Cir. 2001); Commercial Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Aires Envtl. Servs., 259 F.3d 792 (7th Cir. 2001); Dotson v. Delta Consol. Indus., Inc., 251 F.3d 780 (8th Cir. 2001); Selenke v. Med. Imaging of Colo., 248 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. 2001); Herring v. Canada Life Assurance Co., 207 F.3d 1026 (8th C......