constructive discharge claim in Texas

2016State Police v. Suders, 542 U.S. 129, 141 , 124 S.Ct. 2342 , 159 L.Ed.2d 204 (2004) (describing the proper inquiry in a constructive discharge analysis); Williams, 313 S.W.3d at 805 (same); Gardner v. Abbott, 414 S.W.3d 369, 381 (Tex.App.-Austin 2013, no pet.) (same); Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Itz, 21 S.W.3d 456, 475 (Tex.App.Austin 2000, pet. denied) (same); Passons, 969 S.W.2d at 562 (same); see also Comm, on Pattern Jury Charges, State Bar of Tex., Texas Pattern Jury Charges: Employment 107.10 (2014).

2016State Police v. Suders, 542 U.S. 129, 141 , 124 S.Ct. 2342 , 159 L.Ed.2d 204 (2004) (describing the proper inquiry in a constructive discharge analysis); Williams, 313 S.W.3d at 805 (same); Gardner v. Abbott, 414 S.W.3d 369, 381 (Tex.App.-Austin 2013, no pet.) (same); Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Itz, 21 S.W.3d 456, 475 (Tex.App.Austin 2000, pet. denied) (same); Passons, 969 S.W.2d at 562 (same); see also Comm, on Pattern Jury Charges, State Bar of Tex., Texas Pattern Jury Charges: Employment 107.10 (2014).

2011Ass’n , 10 F.3d 292, 297 (5th Cir. 1994) (noting that “whether a reasonable employee would feel compelled to resign depends on the facts of each case” but that it considered the enumerated factors relevant to that determination); see also Cox , 300 S.W.3d at 43 3–34 (noting that the Fifth Circuit has considered those factors in determining a constructive discharge claim). [85] See Suders , 542 U.S. at 1 4 8, 124 S. Ct. at 2355 (stating that “when an official act does not underlie the constructive discharge,” the Ellerth / Faragher affirmative defense may be asserted by the employer). [86] See,

2009Ass’n, 10 F.3d 292, 297 (5th Cir. 1994)); see also Suders, 542 U.S. at 134 , 124 S. Ct. at 2347 (explaining that to maintain a constructive discharge claim, the plaintiff must “show that the abusive working environment became so intolerable that her resignation qualified as a fitting response”).

2016Dist., 821 S.W.2d 174, 178 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1991, no writ) (“Nor do unfavorable work evaluations support a constructive discharge claim.”); Wu v. M.D.

2013See Hammond, 821 S.W.2d at 178 .

2012Cox, 300 S.W.3d at 435 .

2011Ass’n , 10 F.3d 292, 297 (5th Cir. 1994) (noting that “whether a reasonable employee would feel compelled to resign depends on the facts of each case” but that it considered the enumerated factors relevant to that determination); see also Cox , 300 S.W.3d at 43 3–34 (noting that the Fifth Circuit has considered those factors in determining a constructive discharge claim). [85] See Suders , 542 U.S. at 1 4 8, 124 S. Ct. at 2355 (stating that “when an official act does not underlie the constructive discharge,” the Ellerth / Faragher affirmative defense may be asserted by the employer). [86] See,

2025Microsoft Corp. v. Mercieca, 502 S.W.3d 291, 312 (Tex. App.— Houston [14th Dist.] 2016, pet. denied) (holding that an employee’s resignation is an element of a constructive discharge claim).

2023See Mercieca, 502 S.W.3d at 312 .

2024See Green, 578 U.S. at 555 (“[A]n employee cannot bring a constructive-discharge claim until he is constructively discharged.”); Sacks, 83 F.4th at 345 ; Adams, 2006 WL 1553353 , at *4.

2023See Green v. Brennan, 578 U.S. 547, 555 , 136 S. Ct. 1769, 1777 (2016) (holding that, to sustain a constructive discharge claim, a plaintiff must show 17 denied her the right to teach, participate in supervising student organizations, and “engage in any other on-campus activity in which she typically participated.” Conceding that a temporary suspension may not have affected a property interest, Casper instead takes issue with the indefinite and prolonged nature of these prohibitions.

2016See Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Bertrand, 37 S.W.3d 1, 9 (Tex.App.-Tyler 2000, pet. denied) (“An unfavorable work evaluation does not support a constructive discharge claim.”); Bates v. Dallas Indep.

2014Compare Marx, 418 S.W.3d at 634-36 (affirming summary judgment where former employee’s claims of unfair criticism and discipline, threatening termination, precluding transfer, ridicule, isolation, and interference with his medical care were not causally linked to refusal to engage in alleged illegal overbilling), and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Bertrand, 37 S.W.3d 1, 9-12 (Tex.App.-Tyler 2000, pet. denied) (reversing verdict of constructive discharge where evidence establishing various allegations against employee’s supervisor, including name-calling, criticism, and disciplinary actions, was insu

2000Junior v. Texaco, Inc., 688 F.2d 377, 380 (5th Cir.1982).

1991See also Junior v. Texaco, Inc., 688 F.2d 377 , 378 n. 3 (5th Cir.1982).

2016State Police v. Suders, 542 U.S. 129, 141 , 124 S.Ct. 2342 , 159 L.Ed.2d 204 (2004) (describing the proper inquiry in a constructive discharge analysis); Williams, 313 S.W.3d at 805 (same); Gardner v. Abbott, 414 S.W.3d 369, 381 (Tex.App.-Austin 2013, no pet.) (same); Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Itz, 21 S.W.3d 456, 475 (Tex.App.Austin 2000, pet. denied) (same); Passons, 969 S.W.2d at 562 (same); see also Comm, on Pattern Jury Charges, State Bar of Tex., Texas Pattern Jury Charges: Employment 107.10 (2014).

2016State Police v. Suders, 542 U.S. 129, 141 , 124 S.Ct. 2342 , 159 L.Ed.2d 204 (2004) (describing the proper inquiry in a constructive discharge analysis); Williams, 313 S.W.3d at 805 (same); Gardner v. Abbott, 414 S.W.3d 369, 381 (Tex.App.-Austin 2013, no pet.) (same); Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Itz, 21 S.W.3d 456, 475 (Tex.App.Austin 2000, pet. denied) (same); Passons, 969 S.W.2d at 562 (same); see also Comm, on Pattern Jury Charges, State Bar of Tex., Texas Pattern Jury Charges: Employment 107.10 (2014).

2016State Police v. Suders, 542 U.S. 129, 141 , 124 S.Ct. 2342 , 159 L.Ed.2d 204 (2004) (describing the proper inquiry in a constructive discharge analysis); Williams, 313 S.W.3d at 805 (same); Gardner v. Abbott, 414 S.W.3d 369, 381 (Tex.App.-Austin 2013, no pet.) (same); Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Itz, 21 S.W.3d 456, 475 (Tex.App.Austin 2000, pet. denied) (same); Passons, 969 S.W.2d at 562 (same); see also Comm, on Pattern Jury Charges, State Bar of Tex., Texas Pattern Jury Charges: Employment 107.10 (2014).

2016State Police v. Suders, 542 U.S. 129, 141 , 124 S.Ct. 2342 , 159 L.Ed.2d 204 (2004) (describing the proper inquiry in a constructive discharge analysis); Williams, 313 S.W.3d at 805 (same); Gardner v. Abbott, 414 S.W.3d 369, 381 (Tex.App.-Austin 2013, no pet.) (same); Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Itz, 21 S.W.3d 456, 475 (Tex.App.Austin 2000, pet. denied) (same); Passons, 969 S.W.2d at 562 (same); see also Comm, on Pattern Jury Charges, State Bar of Tex., Texas Pattern Jury Charges: Employment 107.10 (2014).

2016State Police v. Suders, 542 U.S. 129, 141 , 124 S.Ct. 2342 , 159 L.Ed.2d 204 (2004) (describing the proper inquiry in a constructive discharge analysis); Williams, 313 S.W.3d at 805 (same); Gardner v. Abbott, 414 S.W.3d 369, 381 (Tex.App.-Austin 2013, no pet.) (same); Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Itz, 21 S.W.3d 456, 475 (Tex.App.Austin 2000, pet. denied) (same); Passons, 969 S.W.2d at 562 (same); see also Comm, on Pattern Jury Charges, State Bar of Tex., Texas Pattern Jury Charges: Employment 107.10 (2014).

2016Dist., 952 S.W.2d 543, 551 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1997, writ denied) (“Nor do unfavorable work evaluations support a constructive discharge claim,”); Hammond v. Katy Indep.

2014Compare Marx, 418 S.W.3d at 634-36 (affirming summary judgment where former employee’s claims of unfair criticism and discipline, threatening termination, precluding transfer, ridicule, isolation, and interference with his medical care were not causally linked to refusal to engage in alleged illegal overbilling), and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Bertrand, 37 S.W.3d 1, 9-12 (Tex.App.-Tyler 2000, pet. denied) (reversing verdict of constructive discharge where evidence establishing various allegations against employee’s supervisor, including name-calling, criticism, and disciplinary actions, was insu

2014Compare Marx, 418 S.W.3d at 634-36 (affirming summary judgment where former employee’s claims of unfair criticism and discipline, threatening termination, precluding transfer, ridicule, isolation, and interference with his medical care were not causally linked to refusal to engage in alleged illegal overbilling), and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Bertrand, 37 S.W.3d 1, 9-12 (Tex.App.-Tyler 2000, pet. denied) (reversing verdict of constructive discharge where evidence establishing various allegations against employee’s supervisor, including name-calling, criticism, and disciplinary actions, was insu

2011Ass’n , 10 F.3d 292, 297 (5th Cir. 1994) (noting that “whether a reasonable employee would feel compelled to resign depends on the facts of each case” but that it considered the enumerated factors relevant to that determination); see also Cox , 300 S.W.3d at 43 3–34 (noting that the Fifth Circuit has considered those factors in determining a constructive discharge claim). [85] See Suders , 542 U.S. at 1 4 8, 124 S. Ct. at 2355 (stating that “when an official act does not underlie the constructive discharge,” the Ellerth / Faragher affirmative defense may be asserted by the employer). [86] See,

2011Ass’n , 10 F.3d 292, 297 (5th Cir. 1994) (noting that “whether a reasonable employee would feel compelled to resign depends on the facts of each case” but that it considered the enumerated factors relevant to that determination); see also Cox , 300 S.W.3d at 43 3–34 (noting that the Fifth Circuit has considered those factors in determining a constructive discharge claim). [85] See Suders , 542 U.S. at 1 4 8, 124 S. Ct. at 2355 (stating that “when an official act does not underlie the constructive discharge,” the Ellerth / Faragher affirmative defense may be asserted by the employer). [86] See,

2011It merely stated an objective inquiry: ―Did working conditions become so intolerable that a reasonable person in the employee‘s position would have felt compelled to resign?‖ 82 But the Court did make clear that a constructive discharge claim ―entails something more‖ than what is required to establish a hostile work environment claim; whereas a hostile work environment sexual harassment claim is established by showing that ―harassing behavior ‗sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of [the plaintiff‘s] employment,‘‖ a constructive discharge claim requires a further showing th