Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment in section 1983 action alleging that defendant’s failure to pay female plaintiff-County Treasurer same salary as male County Clerk violated plaintiff’s equal protection rights. Plaintiff’s proffered testimony from female county board member asserting that her ouster as Chairman was based on her gender was insufficient to constitute direct evidence of gender discrimination in plaintiff's case, since such claim amounted to nothing more that speculation. Moreover, plaintiff’s failure to counter defendant’s claim that her lower salary was based on various instances of perceived job performance deficiencies precluded plaintiff from establishing any gender discrimination claim via indirect method of proof. Fact that plaintiff claimed that certain perceived job performance deficiencies were not her fault did not require different result.