United States v. John Buckendahl

1The Honorable Thomas M. Shanahan, United States District Judge for the
District of Nebraska.
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 00-1894
___________
Teresa Ann Peters, *
*
Appellant, *
*
v. *
* Appeal from the United States
Mutual of Omaha; * District Court for the
* District of Nebraska.
Appellee, *
* [UNPUBLISHED]
Equal Employment Opportunity *
Commission, of Nebraska; *
Shelley Williams, *
*
Defendants. *
___________
Submitted: May 22, 2001
Filed: May 31, 2001
___________
Before HANSEN, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and BYE, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Teresa A. Peters appeals from the district court’s1 judgment for her former
employer, Mutual of Omaha Insurance Company, following a bench trial in her action

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
asserting violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§
12101-12213, and the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 2601-2654.
After careful review of the parties’ submissions, we conclude that the district
court properly awarded judgment to Mutual. See Rankin v. Seagate Techs., Inc., No.
00-1248, 2001 WL 409524 at *2 (8th Cir. Apr. 24, 2001) (FMLA); Cossette v. Minn.
Power & Light, 188 F.3d 964, 972 (8th Cir. 1999) (retaliation); Snow v. Ridgeview
Med. Ctr., 128 F.3d 1201, 1205-06 (8th Cir. 1997) (ADA). Peters’s argument that her
trial counsel was ineffective fails, because a civil litigant has no constitutional right to
effective assistance of counsel. See Glick v. Henderson, 855 F.2d 536, 541 (8th Cir.
1988).
Peters’s remaining arguments either amount to a contention that the district court
should not have believed the testimony of defense witnesses, a contention we must
reject, see United States v. Adipietro, 983 F.2d 1468, 1479 (8th Cir. 1993); or fail for
lack of a showing of any prejudicial abuse of discretion by the district court.
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
A true copy.
Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-- 2 of 2 --