Trahan v. City National Bank ( 1998 )

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-31176
Summary Calendar
CAROL U. TRAHAN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
VERSUS
CITY NATIONAL BANK OF BATON ROUGE, PAUL R. NOWACKI, and KOREEN H.
WALKER,
Defendants-Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Louisiana
(96-CV-504-B-M2)
April 20, 1998
Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Carol U. Trahan appeals the judgment of the district court
granting defendants City National Bank of Baton Rouge, Paul R.
Nowacki, and Koreen H. Walker summary judgment in this case under
the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) case. Finding no
error, we affirm.
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
It is undisputed that Trahan can state a prima facie case of
age discrimination. In support of their summary judgment motion,
the defendants offered as a legitimate non-discriminatory reason
for Trahan’s discharge that she was insubordinate. Because Trahan
failed to provide sufficient summary judgment evidence to show that
her age was a determinative factor in the decision to fire her, her
claim must fail. See Rhodes v. Guiberson Oil Tools, 75 F.3d 989,
993-94 (5th Cir. 1996)(en banc). Although we may not agree that
Trahan’s conduct amounted to insubordination, Trahan nonetheless
failed to show that her age played any factor in the decision to
discharge her.
Moreover, Trahan’s case against defendants Walker and Nowacki
must also be dismissed because they were merely supervisory
employees, not her employer. See Stults v. Conoco, Inc., 76 F.3d
651, 655 (5th Cir. 1996) (holding that the ADEA provides no basis
for individual liability for supervisory employees).
Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
2