law retaliation | retaliatory discharge from employment | termination | demotion | Whistleblower Act claims |
RECENT TEXAS SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
City of Waco, Texas v. Lopez, No. 06-0089 (Tex. July 11, 2008)(Opinion by Justice Wainwright)
(Whistleblower Act, TCHRA, anti-discrimination statute as exclusive remedy for retaliation claim at issue,
failure to satisfy prerequisites for suit by not filing with agency first)
CITY OF WACO, TEXAS v. ROBERT LOPEZ; from Limestone County; 10th district (10-04-00085-CV,
183 SW3d 825, 12-14-05)
The Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and dismisses the case.
Justice Wainwright delivered the opinion of the Court.
The CHRA affords public employees like Lopez a specific and tailored anti-retaliation remedy, and he
was obliged to use it. Because he failed to do so, and the pleadings and evidence establish that he can
no longer pursue a CHRA claim, the trial court should have granted the City’s plea to the jurisdiction and
dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction.
LATOYA BASEY v. DAVITA, INC., D/B/A TOTAL RENAL CARE, NELDA BOATWRIGHT, AND
FRESENIUS MEDICAL CARE HOLDING, INC., D/B/A FRESENIUS MEDICAL CARE NORTH AMERICA
D/B/A NORTHWEST HOUSTON DIALYSIS, AND BIOMEDICAL APPLICATIONS OF TEXAS, INC.; from
14th district (14-07-00925-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 02-24-09, pet. denied July 2009)
(employment dispute, disability discrimination, retaliation, sj for defendant affirmed)
DR. NYLA PTOMEY v. TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY; from Lubbock County;
7th district (07-06-00332-CV, 277 SW3d 487, 01-20-09, pet. denied July 2009)
(age discrimination and sex discrimination and retaliation claims rejected)
Appellant, Dr. Nyla Ptomey, appeals a summary judgment granted in favor of appellee Texas Tech
University on each of her claims of unlawful age and sex discrimination and retaliation. Finding by its
traditional motion for summary judgment Texas Tech conclusively proved a legitimate, non-
discriminatory reason for the adverse employment actions of which Ptomey complains and that the
evidence does not raise a fact issue of pretext, we will affirm.
THOMAS LOUIS v. MOBIL CHEMICAL COMPANY, A DIVISION OF EXXON MOBIL OIL CORPORATION,
JAMES BOWSER AND RANDALL ROY; from Jefferson County; 9th district (09-06-00568-CV, 254 SW3d
602, 05-01-08, pet denied Aug. 1 2008) (Justice O'Neill not sitting) (employment law, IIED, defamation,
After his employment with Mobil Chemical Company ceased, Thomas Louis sued his former employer
and two supervisors, James Bowser and Randall Roy, for intentional infliction of emotional distress,
defamation, and retaliation. The trial court granted summary judgment for all defendants. The four
issues raised by Thomas on appeal contend material fact issues exist as to each of the claims and that
the trial court erred in granting summary judgment. We find no error and affirm the judgment.
JOSEPHINE S. ALOBAIDI v. THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER AT HOUSTON;
from Harris County; 14th district (14-06-00303-CV, ___SW3d ___, 10-30-07, pet. denied March 2008)
(public employment, retaliatory discharge, suits against universities)