Summary Calender THURMAN D. MULLINS v. Sherry Wall, individually

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-60601
Summary Calender
THURMAN D. MULLINS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
SHERRY WALL, individually and in her official
capacity as Administrative Assistant and Safety
Coordinator, Physical Plant Department, The
University of Mississippi,
Defendant-Appellee,
THURMAN D. MULLINS,
Plaintiff,
v.
ROBIN BUCHANNON, in her individual capacity for
damages and in her official capacity for injunctive
relief; JOE SYMONS, in his individual capacity for
damages and in his official capacity for injunctive
relief; BUDDY KAHLER, in his individual capacity for
damages and in his official capacity for injunctive
relief,
Defendants,
* * * * * * * * * * *
________________
No. 00-60019
________________
THURMAN D. MULLINS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.

-- 1 of 3 --

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
2
ROBIN BUCHANNON, in her individual capacity for
damages and in her official capacity for injunctive
relief; JOE SYMONS, in his individual capacity for
damages and in his official capacity for injunctive
relief; BUDDY KAHLER, in his individual capacity for
damages and in his official capacity for injunctive
relief,
Defendants-Appellees.
_______________________________
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Mississippi
(1:97-CV-415-B-D)
_______________________________
August 9, 2000
Before SMITH, BENAVIDES and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
In this consolidated appeal, appellant Thurman D. Mullins
(“Mullins”) contests the district court’s rulings dismissing his
discrimination claims against appellee committee chair Sherry
Wall (“Wall”) and appellees committee members Robin Buchannan,
Joe Symons, and Buddy Kahler (“the Committee”) respectively. In
his first cause of action, Mullins claimed that Wall caused the
Committee to discriminate against him when she withheld negative
information about Marion Vaughn (“Vaughn”), a female and the
successful job applicant, that would have disqualified Vaughn
from consideration for the job. In addition, Mullins asserted

-- 2 of 3 --

3
that Wall stated that it “wouldn’t be no problem to hire a female
applicant,” and that Wall lied about having obtained a glowing
recommendation from Vaughn’s former employer. In his second
cause of action, filed before the district court dismissed the
first, Mullins averred that the Committee discriminated against
him by giving better numerical ratings to candidates less
qualified than he.
The district court granted Wall’s motion for summary
judgment on August 12, 1999; it dismissed Mullins’s case against
the Committee on December 15, 1999. The district court
concluded, in both rulings, that the defendants had articulated a
legitimate, non-discriminatory reason for Mullins’s failure to
obtain the job: he was not as qualified as the other candidates.
Indeed, Mullins ranked fifth out of six applicants for the job,
and another male, Randy Bynum, was the highest ranked male who
did not get the job. Because Mullins could not show that he
would have received the job but for the discrimination, the
district court granted summary judgment in the defendants’ favor.
After a thorough review of the judgments appealed should be
affirmed for essentially the reasons set forth by the district
court.
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --