United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-3863

Richard Hanson, Appellant, v. Kurt Knickerham, Director of DHS; Ruth Whitney, Director, Division of County Operations, DHS; State of Arkansas, Appellees.

Submitted: December 7, 2001 Filed: December 13, 2001

Before BOWMAN, BRIGHT, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Richard Hanson filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Title VII complaint claiming sexual harassment, retaliation, and deprivation of due process by his former employer, the Arkansas Department of Human Services (Department). After a two-day trial, a jury found for the Department on HansonÂ’s harassment and retaliation claims, and the

district court1 found for the Department on the due process claim. Hanson appeals with respect to his harassment and due process claims. After careful review of the record, we affirm.

Based on the evidence at trial, the jury could have concluded that the conduct described by Hanson did not rise to the level of sexual harassment. See Moring v. Arkansas DepÂ’t of Corr., 243 F.3d 452, 456 (8th Cir. 2001). Further, the district court properly held that Hanson did not have a protected property interest. See Batra v. Board of Regents, 79 F.3d 717, 720 (8th Cir. 1996); Rochester Methodist Hosp. v. Travelers Ins. Co., 728 F.2d 1006, 1010 (8th Cir. 1984).

Accordingly, we affirm.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas.

[UNPUBLISHED]

[1] The HONORABLE HARRY F. BARNES, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.