Source: cases/29usc623/f3d-899-629-eggers-v-wells-fargo-bank.case
Case source: https://www.neochart.com/catalog/cases/f3d/volume_899/0629_01/index.html
The district court identified exactly the two policies Eggers challenged.
Because Eggers failed to present any statistical evidence of a disparate impact, and because we may affirm on any ground supported by the record, summary judgment for Wells Fargo is appropriate for lack of a prima facie case.
casedsl 1.2 # author: Flash2 (gemini-3.8-flash-high) # triaged-by: Fable (2026-11-10) case /f3d/899/0629-01 name Eggers v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. cite 899 F.3d 629 (2018) court United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit date 2018-08-13 url catalog/cases/f3d/volume_899/0629_01/index.html source ir/caselaw/f3d_899.jsonl sha1=6509753c8249c7742a9510cac53fb540584f46f9 chars=15760 opinion maj : majority by Smith @0..15760 controlling law 29usc623 role applied posture civil; ADEA disparate impact; summary judgment for employer affirmed by CA8 result claimant-lost element protected-age : satisfied [conceded] route _whole pattern worker-over-forty fact @277..339 [supports] | In 2005, Richard, then age 61, applied to work at Wells Fargo. element neutral-practice : not-reached fact @3017..3226 [neutral] | He alleged Wells Fargo violated the ADEA by (1) refusing to sponsor Section 19 waivers and by (2) failing to provide job applicants and employees with pre-screening notice of the opportunity to obtain waivers. held @10935..11008 | The district court identified exactly the two policies Eggers challenged. gloss The court held only that the district court had correctly identified the two challenged practices; it did not decide whether they satisfy the specific-practice requirement, and disposed of the case on the absence of statistical evidence. element age-disparity : not-satisfied [no-evidence] route _whole pattern no-statistical-evidence-of-impact-from-bank-refusal-to-sponsor-conviction-waivers fact @13863..14112 [cuts-against absent] | However, even assuming that the Section 19 disqualification does not bar Eggers's claim, Eggers failed to present statistical evidence of any kind that the two challenged policies created a disparate impact among Wells Fargo employees older than 40. fact @970..1098 [neutral] | However, the new background check showed that Richard had a fraud conviction under Iowa law in 1963 and served two days in jail. rule @7408..7770 [quoted] | [a] plaintiff ... must first establish a prima facie case ... by identifying a specific employment practice and then presenting statistical evidence of a kind and degree sufficient to show that the practice in question caused the plaintiff to suffer adverse employment action because of his or her membership in a protected group [ (employees age 40 or older) ]. held @15250..15475 | Because Eggers failed to present any statistical evidence of a disparate impact, and because we may affirm on any ground supported by the record, summary judgment for Wells Fargo is appropriate for lack of a prima facie case. gloss The RFOA defense, raised as Eggers's third argument, was not reached.