Background

• Ohnesorge, an employee, sued Winfree Academy Charter School under the Texas Whistleblower Protection Act (WPA).
• The WPA prohibits adverse action against public employees who report violations of law to authorities.
• Winfree Academy Charter School argues it is not a local governmental entity and thus not within WPA scope.
• The trial court granted dismissal for want of jurisdiction, agreeing the School is not subject to the WPA.
• Appellant appeals arguing the School is a public school entity within WPA coverage; appellate court affirms.
• The court reasons that open-enrollment charter schools are not public school districts or political subdivisions for WPA purposes and thus not subject to the WPA.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• City of Waco v. Lopez, 259 S.W.3d 147 (Tex. 2008) (WPA is a broad remedial statute but must follow plain meaning)
• LTTS Charter Sch., Inc. v. C2 Constr., Inc., 288 S.W.3d 31 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2009) (open-enrollment charter school is not automatically a public school district)
• C2 Constr. v. LTTS Charter Sch., Inc., ? (?) (cited for district vs. charter distinction (contextual))
• Guaranty Petroleum Corp. v. Armstrong, 609 S.W.2d 529 (Tex. 1980) (defines political subdivision and its attributes)
• Nat'l Liab. & Fire Ins. Co. v. Allen, 15 S.W.3d 525 (Tex. 2000) (statutory interpretation guidance in construing unambiguous terms)
• Jones v. State, 175 S.W.3d 927 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2005) (interpretation of statutory language in context)
• Fitzgerald v. Advanced Spine Fixation Sys., Inc., 996 S.W.2d 864 (Tex. 1999) (plain meaning governs when language unambiguous)
• Davis v. Ector County, 40 F.3d 777 (5th Cir. 1994) (liberal construction of remedial statutes not override wording)