Marsh v. St Joseph Regn Hlth
Marsh v. St Joseph Regn Hlth
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-20068 Summary Calendar
PATRICIA MARSH,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
ST. JOSEPH REGIONAL HEALTH CENTER,
Defendant-Appellee.
-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-01-CV-1096 -------------------- November 19, 2002
Before JONES, STEWART, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Patricia Marsh is appealing the district court’s order
granting the defendant St. Joseph Regional Health Center’s
(hereinafter the “hospital”) motion for summary judgment on Marsh’s
Employee Retirement and Income Security Act (ERISA) claims. Marsh
contends that the hospital terminated her because she made a claim
for injury benefits under the hospital’s employee benefit plan.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. No. 02-20068 -2-
Marsh failed to come forward with evidence raising an
inference that the hospital terminated her with the specific
discriminatory intent of retaliation for her seeking benefits under
the ERISA plan. Thus, she failed to carry her burden of
establishing a prima facie case of discrimination, the necessary
first element of an ERISA claim. See Stafford v. True Temper
Sports,
123 F.3d 291, 295(5th Cir. 1997).
Further, Marsh failed to provide any evidence showing that the
hospital’s stated reason for her termination, the downsizing of the
staff, was pretextual or false. Marsh failed to present evidence
showing that the true purpose of the action was to deny her
benefits under the employee benefit plan.
Id.Marsh failed to satisfy her summary judgment burden of
producing evidence showing the existence of genuine issues for
trial. See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett,
477 U.S. 317, 324(1986);
FED. R. CIV. P. 56(e). Thus, the district court did not err in
granting the hospital’s motion for summary judgment and dismissing
Marsh’s complaint.
AFFIRMED.
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished