10 results for 'cat:"Jurisdiction" AND cat:"Employment Discrimination" AND cat:"Employment Retaliation"'.
J. Neeley finds the county court properly granted the dept's. plea to the jurisdiction. The female African American former employee filed suit after being denied employment for a position from which she had resigned. She was eventually rehired and filed civil rights charges with the Texas Workforce Commission, alleging she was retaliated against, and that the dept. did not comply with a settlement agreement. The court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because the negligence claim does not fall within the tort claims act's limited waiver of immunity, the state is immune from the claim for breach of the settlement agreement, no prima facie claim for retaliation was stated, and the state is not the employer pursuant to the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Neeley , Filed On: May 8, 2024, Case #: 12-23-00204-CV, Categories: jurisdiction, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Neeley finds the county court properly granted the Department of Health and Human Services' plea to the jurisdiction. The black, female former employee filed suit after being denied employment for a position from which she had resigned. She was eventually rehired and filed civil rights charges with the Texas Workforce Commission, alleging she was retaliated against, and that the department did not comply with a settlement agreement. The court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because the negligence claim does not fall within the Texas Tort Claims Act's limited waiver of immunity, the state is immune from the claim for breach of the settlement agreement, no prima facie claim for retaliation was stated and the state is not the employer pursuant to the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Neeley , Filed On: May 8, 2024, Case #: 12-23-00204-CV, Categories: jurisdiction, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Partida-Kipness finds in this interlocutory appeal that the lower court improperly denied the hospital's plea to the jurisdiction in this lawsuit alleging disability discrimination and retaliation. The former employee contends that his termination was a product of discrimination, but he failed to produce evidence that the hospital's "reasons for terminating him were false or a pretext for discrimination." Accordingly, the claims are dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Reversed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Partida-Kipness, Filed On: March 26, 2024, Case #: 05-22-01358-CV, Categories: jurisdiction, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Benavides finds that the lower court improperly denied the university's plea to the jurisdiction in this lawsuit brought by a former employee alleging racial discrimination and retaliation. The former employee failed to sufficiently plead his claim for racial discrimination, but he also should have been given a chance to amend his petition. Accordingly, that claim will be remanded. He also failed to state a "viable retaliation claim," and his civil conspiracy claim "cannot be saved." Reversed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Benavides, Filed On: November 9, 2023, Case #: 13-23-00062-CV, Categories: jurisdiction, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Goodwin grants the state's dismissal motion in this lawsuit brought by a former employee alleging violations of her rights in connection with her termination. She specifically contends that her termination was based on age and gender discrimination, as well as retaliation for "reports of sexual harassment of other employees." However, the allegations do not establish gender bias under Title VII. The court also declines to exercise jurisdiction over her state law claims.
Court: USDC Western District of Oklahoma , Judge: Goodwin, Filed On: September 29, 2023, Case #: 5:22cv1095, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: jurisdiction, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Bolden grants in part the employer's motion to dismiss, ruling that the court lacks jurisdiction over the employee's Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act claim as a result of her failure to attach a release of jurisdiction letter from the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities. Meanwhile, the lack of any evidence the employee had a disability during her tenure with the company requires dismissal of her ADA claim, while the retaliation claim will proceed because the proximity of the employee's termination to her complaint regarding protected activity establishes a prima facie case at this stage of the litigation.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Bolden, Filed On: August 4, 2023, Case #: 3:23cv31, NOS: Amer w/Disabilities-Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: jurisdiction, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation
J. Ellis grants the employee's motion to remand the gender and sex-based harassment case to a state court. The employee, who was allegedly called fat and lazy by a supervisor, failed to raise a federal question.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Virginia, Judge: Ellis, Filed On: July 14, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv594, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: jurisdiction, employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation