380 S.W.3d 335
Tex. App.2012Background
- Marquez, former EPFD employee, sues City of El Paso under Chapter 21 and later Title VII/§1981; city appeals denial of jurisdiction and summary judgment.
- EEOC/TWC charge filed Sept 15, 2005 alleging retaliation and national origin discrimination; earliest discriminatory acts Apr 1, 2004, latest Sept 14, 2005.
- Appellee alleged retaliation and hostile work environment culminating in a May 2007 resignation/constructive discharge.
- EEOC dismissed May 2, 2006; right-to-sue notice issued Aug 4, 2006; amended petition added federal claims.
- City answered with pleas to jurisdiction and motions for summary judgment; trial court denied; interlocutory appeal ensued.
- Court addresses exhaustion of administrative remedies, continuing violation doctrine, and §1981 vs §1983 jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exhaustion of remedies under EPFD grievance procedures | Marquez not required to exhaust | Exhaustion required under implied contract/arts. | Issue 1 overruled; exhaustion not mandatory for Chapter 21/Title VII. |
| Timeliness of administrative complaint under continuing violation | Continuing violation tolled deadlines; acts ongoing | Deadline strict; no continuing violation | Issue 2 overruled; continuing violation applicable; timely filing. |
| Jurisdiction over §1981 claims against state actors; relation to §1983 | §1981 claim pled; can amend to §1983 | No §1983 link; §1981 lacks jurisdiction | Issue 3 sustained; §1981 claims dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc. v. Zeltwanger, 144 S.W.3d 438 (Tex. 2004) (exhaustion required for some claims; applicable in Texas courts)
- El Paso County v. Navarrete, 194 S.W.3d 677 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2006) (exhaustion standard under Texas law)
- Schroeder v. Tex. Iron Works, Inc., 813 S.W.2d 483 (Tex. 1991) (exhaustion prerequisites for Title VII actions)
- Davis v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 979 S.W.2d 30 (Tex. App.—Austin 1998) (continuing violation doctrine; equitable tolling)
- Poindexter v. Univ. of Texas, 306 S.W.3d 798 (Tex. App.—Austin 2009) (continuing violation application; 180-day clock)
- Rice v. Russell-Stanley, L.P., 131 S.W.3d 510 (Tex. App.—Waco 2004) (exhaustion under Texas labor code; right-to-sue)
- Jett v. Dallas Indep. Sch. Dist., 491 U.S. 701 (U.S. 1989) (§1981 rights; §1983 as exclusive remedy against state actors)
- Meadowbriar Home for Children, Inc. v. Gunn, 81 F.3d 521 (5th Cir. 1996) (§1983 pleading standards; policy/custom requirement)