Alamo Community College District D/B/A Alamo Colleges v. Douglas Ryan, 04-17-00196-CV

Background

Douglas Ryan was a probationary faculty member at Northwest Vista College whose contract was not renewed; he was offered a one-year terminal contract and notified he would be ineligible for adjunct appointment under ACCD policy.
Dr. Jacqueline Claunch sent a nonrenewal/terminal contract letter dated June 28, 2012, which Ryan received by July 5, 2012. The letter referenced ACCD policy barring rehiring as adjuncts after nonrenewal.
Ryan accepted the terminal contract but filed an internal grievance; Chancellor Bruce Leslie denied the grievance on September 27, 2012.
Ryan filed a discrimination charge with the TWC on March 8, 2013 (and sent an EEOC complaint on January 31, 2013), alleging discrimination based on race, sex, and age, and later sued under the TCHRA after receiving right-to-sue notices.
ACCD moved for summary judgment asserting lack of subject-matter jurisdiction because Ryan failed to file an administrative complaint within the TCHRA’s 180-day deadline measured from when he was informed of the employment decision.
The trial court partially denied ACCD’s motion as to Ryan’s claim that ACCD barred him from all district campuses; ACCD appealed. The court of appeals reversed and rendered dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the 180-day TCHRA filing period began when Ryan received Claunch’s June 28 letter or when the chancellor denied his grievance	Ryan: Claunch’s letter was a proposal; the decision became final on Sept. 27 when the chancellor denied the grievance, so his charge was timely	ACCD: The June 28 letter notified Ryan of the employment decision and its consequences; 180-day clock began upon notice (July 5) and Ryan missed the deadline	Held: 180-day period began when Ryan received the June 28 notice; his charge was untimely and court lacked jurisdiction
Whether pursuing an internal grievance tolled or delayed the 180-day filing period	Ryan: Grievance meant decision not final until chancellor ruled, so filing deadline triggered later	ACCD: Grievance does not toll the statutory filing period	Held: Grievance did not toll the period; internal appeal does not delay TCHRA deadline
Whether Claunch’s notice was ultra vires with respect to district-wide adjunct ineligibility (affecting accrual)	Ryan: Claunch lacked authority to bar rehire district-wide; that alleged ultra vires act wasn’t actionable until chancellor decided	ACCD: The adjunct ineligibility was a board policy consequence of nonrenewal, not a separate act by Claunch requiring additional approval	Held: No ultra vires act; adjunct ineligibility flowed from board policy and accrued when Ryan was notified
Whether trial court had subject-matter jurisdiction over Ryan’s TCHRA claims	Ryan: Jurisdiction exists because his charge was timely measured from Sept. 27	ACCD: Jurisdiction lacking due to missed 180-day deadline from July 5	Held: Court lacked jurisdiction; summary judgment reversed in part and judgment rendered dismissing claims for lack of jurisdiction

Key Cases Cited

Prairie View A & M Univ. v. Chatha, 381 S.W.3d 500 (Tex. 2012) (180-day period begins when employee is informed of discriminatory decision)
Specialty Retailers, Inc. v. DeMoranville, 933 S.W.2d 490 (Tex. 1996) (statutory filing requirement is mandatory)
Delaware State College v. Ricks, 449 U.S. 250 (1980) (grievance procedure is a remedy for a prior decision and does not make earlier decision tentative)