Kenny Jones v. NRG Texas, LLC
10-16-00260-CV
| Tex. App. | Apr 26, 2017Background
- Kenny Jones injured his thigh at work in Feb. 2011, received minimal medical treatment, and filed a workers’ compensation claim; he returned to work without missing time for the claim.
- Jones was terminated in June 2013 after investigations for insubordination, threats/menacing drawings on his toolbox, repeated tardiness/absences without proper reporting, driving company vehicles without a valid license, and other workplace conflicts.
- An earlier termination (Sept. 2011) was overturned by arbitration; Jones was reinstated in Oct. 2012 subject to a two-year condition that insubordination could result in summary termination.
- Employer identity was contested: records variously listed NRG Texas, LLC and NRG Energy, Inc.; summary-judgment evidence showed payroll and benefits records naming NRG Energy, Inc.
- At summary judgment, NRG argued it had legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for termination and that decision-makers were unaware of Jones’s 2011 workers’ compensation claim.
- The trial court granted NRG’s traditional and no-evidence summary judgment; the Tenth Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether termination was retaliation for filing workers’ comp claim | Jones: termination was causally linked to his 2011 claim (retaliation) | NRG: legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons; decision‑makers unaware of claim; two‑year gap undermines causation | Summary judgment for NRG affirmed — no evidence of retaliatory motive |
| Employer identity (who employed Jones) | Jones: disputed whether NRG Texas, LLC or NRG Energy, Inc. was employer | NRG: records (W‑2, paystub, benefits) show NRG Energy, Inc. was employer; NRG Texas, LLC not employer | Court treated employer evidence showing NRG Energy, Inc. as Jones’s employer; identity issue did not defeat summary judgment |
| Failure to follow company policies (progressive discipline/drug testing) | Jones: NRG failed to follow progressive discipline and drug‑testing policies | NRG: Jones signed reinstatement acknowledging summary termination for insubordination; reasonable‑suspicion testing documented | Court: Jones did not show company policy was not followed in a way that supports retaliation claim |
| Comparators/similarly situated employees | Jones: others were treated better | NRG: cited employees had different positions, supervisors, or conduct | Court: comparators not similarly situated; plaintiff failed to show disparate treatment |
| Falsity of stated reasons for termination | Jones: employer’s reasons were pretextual | NRG: evidence supported the stated reasons; Jones admitted many facts (no license, conflicts, toolbox drawings, attendance problems) | Court: no evidence that reasons were false; pretext not shown |
Key Cases Cited
- Nixon v. Mr. Prop. Mgmt. Co., Inc., 690 S.W.2d 546 (Tex. 1985) (summary judgment standard)
- Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc. v. Havner, 953 S.W.2d 706 (Tex. 1997) (no‑evidence standard explained)
- Continental Coffee Prods. Co. v. Cazarez, 937 S.W.2d 444 (Tex. 1996) (factors for proving causal link in workers’ comp retaliation)
- Texas Division–Tranter v. Carrozza, 876 S.W.2d 312 (Tex. 1994) (burden shifting when employer offers legitimate reason)
- M.D. Anderson Hosp. & Tumor Inst. v. Willrich, 28 S.W.3d 22 (Tex. 2000) (summary judgment and burden on nonmovant to produce evidence of retaliatory motive)
- Ysleta Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Monarrez, 177 S.W.3d 915 (Tex. 2005) (standard for similarly situated employees)