Legal Opinion
Thomas Nash v. Optomec, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Decided March 1, 2017No. 16-2186PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RILEY, Chief Judge.
Thomas Nash filed suit against Opto-mec, Inc., alleging the company fired him on account of his age in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA), Minn. Stat. §§ 363A.01, et seq. The- district court 1 granted Optomec’s motion for summary judgment, finding Nash failed to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination, and even if he had, there was insufficient evidence to suggest the lawful reason Optomec gave for its decision was pretext for an underlying unlawful motive. Nash appeals, see 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (appellate jurisdiction), and we affirm.
I. BACKGROUND
In…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Tolan v. CottonSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
- Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Ricci v. DeStefanoSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Baxter v. PalmigianoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Torgerson v. City of RochesterCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- James Aulick v. Skybridge Americas, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2017
- Troy Scheffler v. Gurstel Chargo, P.A.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2018
- Hillesheim v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2021
- Kenneth Wilson v. TK Elevators CorporationDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 2025
- Taylor Haynie v. Washington University School of Medicine Division of Infectious DiseasesDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 2023