Federal Circuits, 5th Cir. (March 11, 1998)
Docket number: 97-50680
Permanent Link:
http://vlex.com/vid/valcher-vs-west-18392666
Id. vLex: VLEX-18392666
Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

* Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR .
R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit No. 97-50680 Summary Calendar DONALD M. VALCHER, Plaintiff-Appellant, VERSUS TOGO D. WEST, JR., Secretary of the United States Army, Defendant-Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court For the Western District of Texas (SA-97-CV-389) March 10, 1998 Before WISDOM, WIENER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.PER CURIAM: * Donald M. Valcher, an employee with the Operation Maintenance Division of the United States Arm y Medical Department Center at Fort Sam Houston, Texas, filed a lawsuit against the Secretary of the Army in which he alleged that the Army retaliated against him, in violation of Title VII, for filing a prior Equal Employment See Long v. E astfield College , 88 F.3d 300, 304 (5th Cir. 1996). The evidence in this case showed that Valcher verbally abused fellow employees and attempted to provoke phy sical altercations. 2 Opportunity grievan ce. The alleged retaliation consisted of a five-day suspension from duty under a pretext of unacceptable workplace misconduct. The district court dismissed ValcherÂ’s complaint be cause he failed to exhaust administrative remedies, and, in the alternative, granted summary judgment in favor of the Army because Valcher failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to his contention that his suspension was driven by improper retaliatory motive. We affirm.Ev en if we were to determine that Valcher exhausted his administrative rem edies, a d e novo review of the record reveals that summary judgment was appropriate. The defendant articulated legit imate, non-retaliatory reasons for suspending Valcher. 2 Because Valcher has not made a colorable showing that the defendantÂ’s proffered reasons are pretextual, he cannot escape summary judgment.AFFIRMED.Try vLex for FREE for 3 days
Access legal information from United States including:
Try vLex without any commitment for 3 days and see why you need it.
3
days of Free Access