Tex. Codes » Labor Code · TITLE 2. PROTECTION OF LABORERS · SUBTITLE A. EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION · CHAPTER 21. EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION
Texas Codes

Tex. Lab. Code § 21.202 (2026)

Statute Of Limitations

✓ laws through the 89th Legislature (2025)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 21.202. STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. (a) Except as provided by Subsection (a-1), a complaint under this subchapter must be filed not later than the 180th day after the date the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred.

(a-1) A complaint under this subchapter alleging sexual harassment must be filed not later than the 300th day after the date the alleged sexual harassment occurred.

(b) The commission shall dismiss an untimely complaint.

Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 269, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1993.

Amended by:

Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., Ch. 443 (H.B. 21), Sec. 2, eff. September 1, 2021.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 215 cases (48 in the last 5 years), 1996–2026 · leading case: Prairie View A&M Univ. v. Diljit K. Chatha, 381 S.W.3d 500 (Tex. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Prairie View A&M Univ. v. Diljit K. Chatha, 381 S.W.3d 500 (Tex. 2012). · cites it 9× “See Tex. Lab. Code § 21.202. The University specifically alleged that Chatha was aware of the alleged discriminatory salary in 2004, yet failed to file a complaint until 2006.”
Comptroller v. LANDSFELD, 352 S.W.3d 171 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2011). · cites it 12× “See Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 21.202 (West 2006) (stating that a complaint must be filed within 180 days of the occurrence of the allegedly discriminatory action).”
Waffle House, Inc. v. Williams, 313 S.W.3d 796 (Tex. 2010). · cites it 2× “[35] TEX. LAB.CODE § 21.202(a). [36] Id. § 21.”
John Hinkley v. Envoy Air, Inc., 968 F.3d 544 (5th Cir. 2020). · cites it 3× “Instead, they contend only that the dismissal of their Texas Labor Code claim should have been pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) and, therefore, without prejudice because, in their view, Texas Labor Code § 21.202 strips Texas courts of jurisdiction over unexhausted claims.”
Cooper-Day v. RME Petroleum Co., 121 S.W.3d 78 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2003). · cites it 4× “The primary issue we address in this appeal is whether Cooper-Day timely filed her administrative complaint as mandated by Texas Labor Code section 21.202. Tex. Lab.”
Texas Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Alexander, 300 S.W.3d 62 (Tex. App.—Austin 2009). · cites it 4× “See Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 21.202(a); City of Keller v.”
Texas Parks & Wildlife Dep't v. Dearing, 150 S.W.3d 452 (Tex. App.—Austin 2004). · cites it 3× “Tex. Lab. Code Ann. § 21.202 (West 1996).”
Univ. of Texas v. Poindexter, 306 S.W.3d 798 (Tex. App.—Austin 2009). · cites it 2× “"); see also Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 21.202(b) ("The commission shall dismiss an untimely complaint.”
Williams v. Vought, 68 S.W.3d 102 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2001). · cites it 4× “Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 21.202 (Vernon 1996).”
Davis v. AutoNation USA Corp., 226 S.W.3d 487 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006). · cites it 3× “” Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 21.202 (Vernon 2006).”
Austin Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Lowery, 212 S.W.3d 827 (Tex. App.—Austin 2006). · cites it 2× “See Tex. Lab. Code Ann. § 21.202 (West 2006) (requiring administrative complaint to be filed within 180 days of occurrence); see also Schroeder v.”
George Clark v. Champion Nat'l Sec, Inc., 952 F.3d 570 (5th Cir. 2020). “” TEX. LABOR CODE § 21.202(a). As the district court explained, “[a] charge filed with the EEOC, more than 180 days after the occurrence of an alleged unlawful employment practice under the [TCHRA], is subject to dismissal as time-barred.”
Show all 215 citing cases →
Tex. Lab. Code § 21.202(A): 1 case
Agoh v. Hyatt Corp., 992 F. Supp. 2d 722 (S.D. Tex. 2014).
Tex. Lab. Code § 21.202(a): 77 cases
Waffle House, Inc. v. Williams, 313 S.W.3d 796 (Tex. 2010). “[35] TEX. LAB.CODE § 21.202(a). [36] Id. § 21.”
Prairie View A&M Univ. v. Diljit K. Chatha, 381 S.W.3d 500 (Tex. 2012). “See Tex. Lab. Code § 21.202. The University specifically alleged that Chatha was aware of the alleged discriminatory salary in 2004, yet failed to file a complaint until 2006.”
George Clark v. Champion Nat'l Sec, Inc., 952 F.3d 570 (5th Cir. 2020). “” TEX. LABOR CODE § 21.202(a). As the district court explained, “[a] charge filed with the EEOC, more than 180 days after the occurrence of an alleged unlawful employment practice under the [TCHRA], is subject to dismissal as time-barred.”
Tarrant Cnty. v. Vandigriff, 71 S.W.3d 921 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2002).
Texas Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Alexander, 300 S.W.3d 62 (Tex. App.—Austin 2009). “See Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 21.202(a); City of Keller v.”
Tex. Lab. Code § 21.202(b): 6 cases
Prairie View A&M Univ. v. Diljit K. Chatha, 381 S.W.3d 500 (Tex. 2012). “See Tex. Lab. Code § 21.202. The University specifically alleged that Chatha was aware of the alleged discriminatory salary in 2004, yet failed to file a complaint until 2006.”
Univ. of Texas v. Poindexter, 306 S.W.3d 798 (Tex. App.—Austin 2009). “"); see also Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 21.202(b) ("The commission shall dismiss an untimely complaint.”
Texas Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Alexander, 300 S.W.3d 62 (Tex. App.—Austin 2009). “See Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 21.202(a); City of Keller v.”
Comptroller v. LANDSFELD, 352 S.W.3d 171 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2011). “See Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 21.202 (West 2006) (stating that a complaint must be filed within 180 days of the occurrence of the allegedly discriminatory action).”
Bexar Cnty., Tx v. Gant, 70 S.W.3d 289 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2002).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.