Texas Department of Transportation v. Albert Lara, Jr., 577 S.W.3d 641

Albert Lara, long‑time TxDOT engineering technician, underwent surgery in May 2015 and exhausted his own paid leave.
He applied for sick‑leave‑pool (SLP) donations and initially received unpaid FMLA through June 23, 2015; later physicians certified a catastrophic condition and TxDOT granted SLP leave up to the 720‑hour maximum, expiring September 16, 2015.
Lara requested additional leave (doctor estimated return as late as October 21, 2015) and repeatedly contacted supervisors, HR, and payroll asking how to keep his job; he did not submit a formal unpaid‑leave application despite being given the form.
TxDOT notified Lara on September 9 that he would be terminated if he did not return within seven days; he was terminated after failing to return.
Lara sued under the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act (TCHRA) alleging failure to accommodate (discrimination) and retaliation; the district court denied TxDOT’s combined plea to the jurisdiction and motion for summary judgment. The Court of Appeals affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Lara stated a viable failure‑to‑accommodate claim (discrimination under TCHRA §21.128)	Lara requested a reasonable accommodation (additional unpaid leave) that would have made him qualified and the request was known to TxDOT	TxDOT argued Lara wasn’t a qualified individual and his leave request was unreasonable and untimely	Court: Issue of fact exists on qualification, reasonableness, and undue hardship; plea to jurisdiction properly overruled as to discrimination claim
Whether Lara’s request for leave or other conduct constituted protected activity for a TCHRA retaliation claim (§21.055)	Lara contends his repeated requests for accommodation are protected activity, triggering retaliation protection	TxDOT argues Lara’s only protected act (filing a TWC charge) occurred after termination; TCHRA’s §21.055 does not expressly protect exercise of rights like ADA §12203 does	Court: Retaliation claim fails—protected activity occurred after termination; TCHRA’s text does not extend retaliation protection to accommodation requests; plea to jurisdiction should have been sustained for retaliation claim

Alamo Heights Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Clark, 544 S.W.3d 755 (Tex. 2018) (TCHRA pleading/jurisdiction framework when employer offers nonretaliatory justification)
Texas Dep’t of Parks & Wildlife v. Miranda, 133 S.W.3d 217 (Tex. 2004) (standard for evidence and jurisdictional inquiry against governmental immunity)
Mission Consol. Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Garcia, 372 S.W.3d 629 (Tex. 2012) (TCHRA waiver of sovereign immunity only for conduct that violates the statute)
Texas Nat. Res. Conservation Comm’n v. IT‑Davy, 74 S.W.3d 849 (Tex. 2002) (governmental immunity bars suit absent legislative consent)
City of Fort Worth v. Zimlich, 29 S.W.3d 62 (Tex. 2000) (factors for assessing causation in retaliation claims)
Criado v. IBM Corp., 145 F.3d 437 (1st Cir. 1998) (leave as a potentially reasonable accommodation)
Tarrant Reg’l Water Dist. v. Villanueva, 331 S.W.3d 125 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2010) (statutory interpretation caution; courts should not add language omitted by Legislature)