Serben v. Inter-City Mfg. Co., Inc.
| Decision Date | 30 September 1994 |
| Docket Number | INTER-CITY,Nos. 94-1178,94-1182 and 94-1185,s. 94-1178 |
| Citation | 36 F.3d 765 |
| Parties | 65 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. (BNA) 1706 Nicholas SERBEN, Appellant, v.MANUFACTURING CO., INC., Appellee. Nicholas SERBEN, Appellee, v.MANUFACTURING CO., INC., Appellant. Nicholas SERBEN, Appellee, v.MANUFACTURING CO., INC., Appellant. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
David O. Danis, St. Louis, MO, argued, for appellant.
Howard K. Munson, St. Louis, MO, argued, for appellee.
Before FAGG, Circuit Judge, HEANEY, Senior Circuit Judge, and BOWMAN, Circuit Judge.
Inter-City Manufacturing Co., Inc. (Inter-City) hired Nicholas Serben for a new sales manager position when Serben was fifty-two years old. Less than one year later, following the loss of two substantial customers, Inter-City eliminated the sales manager position and terminated Serben's employment. Serben brought this age discrimination action under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. Secs. 621-634 (1988 & Supp. V 1993), and the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA), Mo.Rev.Stat. ch. 213 (Supp.1993). A jury found Inter-City discriminated against Serben because of his age and awarded back pay, but did not award liquidated damages under the ADEA or punitive damages under the MHRA. The district court awarded Serben front pay and attorney fees. Serben appeals and Inter-City cross-appeals. We reverse on Inter-City's cross-appeal.
Inter-City contends the district court erroneously failed to grant Inter-City's renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law (JAML) after the verdict. "In reviewing a denial of a motion for a judgment as a matter of law, we must determine whether there is sufficient evidence to support a jury verdict." Nelson v. Boatmen's Bancshares, Inc., 26 F.3d 796, 800 (8th Cir.1994). We focus on the ultimate factual issue: whether Inter-City intentionally discriminated against Serben because of his age. See id. at 800-01.
Having carefully reviewed the record in the light most favorable to Serben, see id., we conclude Serben presented no direct evidence of age discrimination nor sufficient circumstantial evidence for the jury reasonably to infer Serben's age actually motivated his employer's decision. Serben was the same age when the sales manager position was eliminated and he was terminated as when he was hired. See Lowe v. J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc., 963 F.2d 173, 174 (8th Cir.1992). Serben's mere membership in the protected class does not permit an inference of age discrimination. See Skagen v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 910 F.2d 1498, 1500 (7th Cir.1990); Holley v. Sanyo Mfg., Inc., 771 F.2d 1161, 1167 (8th Cir.1985). Serben's status as an experienced and thus higher paid employee also does not in itself permit an inference of age discrimination. See Hazen Paper Co. v....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Burgess v. A.M. Multigraphics a Div. A.M. Intern.
...has established that there was an available position which he was barred from because of his age. See Serben v. Inter-City Mfg. Co., Inc., 36 F.3d 765, 766 (8th Cir.1994) (refusal to accept plaintiff's offer to work in a lower paid sales representative position does not show age discriminat......
-
Rothmeier v. Investment Advisers, Inc.
...for this proposition, defendant's cite Lowe v. J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc., 963 F.2d 173, 174-75 (8th Cir.1992), Serben v. Inter-City Mfg. Co., 36 F.3d 765 (8th Cir.1994), Proud v. Stone, 945 F.2d 796 (4th Cir.1991) and Ward, 516 N.W.2d at None of the cited cases stands for the proposition fo......
-
Tuttle v. Missouri Dept. of Agriculture
...108 F.3d 970, 975 (8th Cir.1997), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 118 S.Ct. 851, 139 L.Ed.2d 752 (1998); Serben v. Inter-City Mfg. Co., Inc., 36 F.3d 765, 766 (8th Cir.1994) (per curiam). Tuttle contends that he presented sufficient evidence from which a jury could reasonably infer that his te......
-
Hutson v. McDonnell Douglas Corp.
...the other employment-discrimination statutes, is intentional discrimination against the plaintiff. See Serben v. Inter-City Mfg. Co., Inc., 36 F.3d 765, 766 (8th Cir.1994) (per curiam), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 115 S.Ct. 1402, 131 L.Ed.2d 290 (1995); Bethea v. Levi Strauss & Co., 827 F.......