191918P.pdf   04/29/2021  Jonathan Scarborough  v.  Federated Mutual Insurance Co.
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  19-1918
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota   
   [PUBLISHED] [Kelly, Author, with Colloton and Arnold, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - Minnesota Whistleblower Act. For the court's prior opinion in 
   the matter, see Scarborough v. Federated Mut. Ins. Co., 894 F.3d 1277 (8th 
   Cir. 2018). Absent direct evidence that plaintiff was retaliated against 
   for flagging a subordinate's expense reporting, the claim of retaliation 
   under the Act would be analyzed under the McDonnell Douglas 
   burden-shifting framework; assuming plaintiff made a prima facie case of 
   retaliation, the employer offered legitimate, non-discriminatory grounds 
   for the adverse employment action, which plaintiff failed to show were 
   pretexts for retaliation against him for blowing the whistle on his 
   subordinate.