Eddie Wyatt v. J. B. Hunt Transport , 366 F. App'x 718 ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 09-2267
    ___________
    Eddie R. Wyatt,                          *
    *
    Appellant,                  *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                                 * District Court for the
    * Eastern District of Arkansas.
    J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc.,               *
    * [UNPUBLISHED]
    Appellee.                   *
    ___________
    Submitted: February 23, 2010
    Filed: February 25, 2010
    ___________
    Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Eddie Wyatt appeals the District Court's1 adverse grant of summary judgment
    in his action alleging that J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc., terminated him as a commercial
    truck driver in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C.
    §§ 12101–12213, and Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations, 49 C.F.R.
    § 382.121. After careful de novo review, we find no error in the district court’s grant
    of summary judgment. Johnson v. Blaukat, 
    453 F.3d 1108
    , 1112 (8th Cir. 2006)
    (standard of review); 49 C.F.R. § 391.41(b)(13) ("A person is physically qualified to
    1
    The Honorable James M. Moody, United States District Judge for the Eastern
    District of Arkansas.
    drive a commercial motor vehicle if that person . . . [h]as no current clinical diagnosis
    of alcoholism."); Huber v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 
    486 F.3d 480
    , 482 (8th Cir. 2007)
    (noting that to make a prima facie case in a reasonable-accommodation claim under
    the ADA, a plaintiff must show, inter alia, that he is a qualified individual); Williams
    v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 
    527 F.3d 1135
    , 1137 (10th Cir. 2008) (noting that DOT
    regulations requiring drug and alcohol testing for safety-sensitive positions in
    transportation industries do not provide for a "private cause of action . . . to aggrieved
    employees for a violation of the procedural protections"). Accordingly, we affirm.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-2267

Citation Numbers: 366 F. App'x 718

Filed Date: 2/25/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/12/2023