20 Texas opinions name it 1 courts 1996–2012 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Texas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Travis County v. Colungagreen2 sentences2000See Travis County v. Colunga, 753 S.W.2d 716, 718-19 (Tex.App.—Austin 1988, writ denied). 2000See Travis County v. Colunga , 753 S.W.2d 716, 718-19 (Tex. App.--Austin 1988, writ denied). | 6 | 7 |
Castaneda v. Texas Department of Agriculturegreen2 sentences2002Gregg County v. Farrar, 933 S.W.2d 769, 775 (TexApp.-Austin 1996, writ denied); see also Castaneda v. Texas Dep’t of Agric., 831 S.W.2d 501, 503 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1992, writ denied). 1996See Travis County v. Colunga , 753 S.W.2d 716, 718-19 (Tex. App.--Austin 1988, writ denied); see also Castaneda v. Texas Dep't of Agric. , 831 S.W.2d 501, 501 (Tex. App.--Corpus Christi 1992, writ denied). | 3 | 3 |
City of San Antonio v. Heimgreen2 sentences2002In the present case, we find the Department’s no-evidence summary judgment motion dispositive of Duvall’s whistleblower claim. 5 DISCUSSION Texas Whistleblower Act The purpose of the Texas Whistleblower Act is twofold: (1) to enhance open government by protecting public employees from retaliation by their employer when an employee reports a violation of the law in good faith; and (2) to secure lawful conduct by those who “direct and conduct the affairs of government.” See City of San Antonio v. Heim, 932 S.W.2d 287, 290 (Tex App.—Austin 1996, writ denied). 2002DISCUSSION Texas Whistleblower Act The purpose of the Texas Whistleblower Act is twofold: (1) to enhance open government by protecting public employees from retaliation by their employer when an employee reports a violation of the law in good faith; and (2) to secure lawful conduct by those who "direct and conduct the affairs of government." See City of San Antonio v. Heim , 932 S.W.2d 287, 290 (Tex App.--Austin 1996, writ denied). | 3 | 3 |
Texas Department of Human Services v. Greengreen2 sentences1996Travis County v. Colunga, 753 S.W.2d 716, 718-19 (Tex.App.—Austin 1988, writ denied); see also Green, 855 S.W.2d at 142 . 1996Travis County v. Colunga , 753 S.W.2d 716, 718-19 (Tex. App.--Austin 1988, writ denied); see also Green , 855 S.W.2d at 142 . | 2 | 2 |
Tarrant County v. McQuarygreen1 sentence2012See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. §§ 554.001-.010 (West 2004); Tarrant Cnty. v. McQuary, 310 S.W.3d 170, 173 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2010, pet. denied) ("The Whistleblower Act has a twofold purpose: (1) protecting a public employee from retaliation by her employer when, in good faith, the employee reports a violation of law, and (2) securing lawful conduct on the part of those who direct and conduct the affairs of public bodies.”). 11 . | 1 | 1 |
City of Houston v. Levingstongreen1 sentence2010“Once suffi *559 cient evidence is produced to support a finding of the non-existence of the causal connection between the termination or suspension and the reported violation of law, the case proceeds as if no presumption had ever existed.” City of Houston v. Levingston, 221 S.W.3d 204, 226 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.). | 1 | 1 |
Gregg County v. Farrargreen1 sentence2002Gregg County v. Farrar, 933 S.W.2d 769, 775 (TexApp.-Austin 1996, writ denied); see also Castaneda v. Texas Dep’t of Agric., 831 S.W.2d 501, 503 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1992, writ denied). | 1 | 1 |
Wichita County, Texas v. Hartgreen1 sentence1999See Wichita County, Tex. v. Hart, 917 S.W.2d 779, 784 (Tex.1996). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
City of Austin v. Ender
green
2 sentences2010Ender, 30 S.W.3d at 594 ; see also Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 554.002(a) (“A state or local governmental entity may not suspend or terminate the employment of, or take other adverse personnel action against, a public employee who in good faith reports a violation of law by the employing governmental entity or another public employee to an appropriate law enforcement authority.”). 2010Ender, 30 S.W.3d at 594 ; see also Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 554.002(a) (“A state or local governmental entity may not suspend or terminate the employment of, or take other adverse personnel action against, a public employee who in good faith reports a violation of law by the employing governmental entity or another public employee to an appropriate law enforcement authority”). | 6 | 2002–2010 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.