Search Site
Menu
Texas Whistleblower Act Has Jurisdiction

A state employee sent an email to a superior declaring that if a particular contract were not honored, then the entire department would not be complying with federal regulation. After being fired, the employee sued under the Texas Whistleblower Act (TWA) and attached a copy of the email.  The Texas Supreme Court dismissed the complaint because the plaintiff’s pleadings affirmatively negated the trial court’s jurisdiction.

To understand the Texas Supreme Court’s decision, the TWA’s jurisdiction needs to be examined.

Texas Whistleblower Act’s Jurisdiction

The TWA protects public employees from retaliatory acts by their employers when the employees in good faith report a violation of law by the employer to a proper law enforcement agency.

The following are two components to a court’s jurisdiction under the TWA:

  1. The person invoking the TWA must be a public employee
  2. The complainant must allege facts to support elements of the case at the pleading stage

If the complainant does not cite facts to support elements of the case at the pleading stage, then the government employer may raise the defense of government immunity.  The TWA says that a public employee who alleges a violation of this law may sue and the state agency’s sovereign immunity is waived to the extent of liability for a violation of this law.

Steps to show elements of the case to prove jurisdiction

To proceed with a TWA suit, the complainant must establish that the trial court has subject matter jurisdiction.  To do this, the plaintiff needs to demonstrate that he did the following:

  1. Made a good faith report of the violation of law; and
  2. Reported the violation of law to a proper law enforcement authority

Under the TWA, a violation of the law may be a violation of any of the following:

  1. A state or federal statute
  2. A local governmental ordinance
  3. A rule enacted under a statute or ordinance

Under the TWA, a proper law enforcement authority is a governmental entity that the plaintiff believes possesses the authority to do the following:

  1. Investigate or prosecute violations of law against parties outside of its agency, or
  2. Enact regulations governing the conduct of third parties

When a professor of surgery at The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center reported violations of Medicaid and Medicare violations to a supervisory faculty member, the Texas Supreme Court concluded that plaintiff did not report to an appropriate law enforcement authority, and was not shielded under TWA.

Filing a lawsuit under the TWA is too important to have the court dismiss your suit for failing to meet a procedural requirement.  If a state agency retaliated against you for exercising your legal rights under the TWA, consult with a Texas whistleblower attorney before proceeding any further.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Honors
Our Office
  • Dallas Office
    4514 Cole Ave
    #600
    Dallas, Texas 75205
    Phone: 214-306-8045
    Fax: 469-729-9926
Testimonials
  • "Steve Kardell was terrific in representing me in some very adversarial discussions with Citigroup and also later represented me in my testimony before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission."  -Richard Bowen, Citigroup Whistleblower

  • "Incredible knowledge of employee related concerns and equally brilliant knowledge of health care regulations, standards of practice. I would recommend this firm to anyone."  -V.B.

  • "Reaching out to Steve Kardell was the best decision I made. His ability to provide immediate insight and direction was very powerful, and a huge relief during a very stressful time period. For anyone struggling with a whistleblower situation, I would highly recommend at least speaking with Steve. After a 10 minute call with him, I had a better understanding of what I was dealing with. Even better, he gave me some immediate hope. In the end Steve did a better job than I thought was possible. Steve was able to get in contact with people in my organization, that I didn’t have access to. Because of his years of experience, he already has contacts in many organizations in Dallas. The entire situation was handled peacefully. I was impressed by his ability to “keep the peace”–rather than creating a battle with the organization. The reason I didn’t reach out to a lawyer initially, was because I thought it would mean an immediate end to any hope of a positive relationship with the company. Steve was able to address my concerns, and in the end I was able to continue to work for them."  -KS

  • "Never thought my career would end like it did after 30 years of service. I was part of the first round of the so called reduction of force. I asked myself how can I be part of this with 30 years of seniority. How did they pick these 90 plus employees? Now, the culture of this organization made you question every decision they made. It wasn’t what you knew it’s was a culture of who you know. Nonetheless, I did not accept their severance package. I immediately starting looking for an attorney who would take on my case. After the initial call to Steve I had hope again. He was open and honest about everything and reassured me he would do his best for me, and he did. I had an awesome outcome. Thanks Steve you’re the best."  -S.S.

FOLLOW US
Facebook Twitter Linkedin RSS Feed JD Supra