Texas Codes
Tex. Lab. Code § 21.2585 (2026)
Compensatory And Punitive Damages
✓ laws through the 89th Legislature (2025)
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 21.2585. COMPENSATORY AND PUNITIVE DAMAGES. (a) On finding that a respondent engaged in an unlawful intentional employment practice as alleged in a complaint, a court may, as provided by this section, award:
(1) compensatory damages; and
(2) punitive damages.
(b) A complainant may recover punitive damages against a respondent, other than a respondent that is a governmental entity, if the complainant demonstrates that the respondent engaged in a discriminatory practice with malice or with reckless indifference to the state-protected rights of an aggrieved individual.
(c) Compensatory damages awarded under this section may not include:
(1) back pay;
(2) interest on back pay; or
(3) other relief authorized under Section 21.258(b).
(d) The sum of the amount of compensatory damages awarded under this section for future pecuniary losses, emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life, and other nonpecuniary losses and the amount of punitive damages awarded under this section may not exceed, for each complainant:
(1) $50,000 in the case of a respondent that has fewer than 101 employees;
(2) $100,000 in the case of a respondent that has more than 100 and fewer than 201 employees;
(3) $200,000 in the case of a respondent that has more than 200 and fewer than 501 employees; and
(4) $300,000 in the case of a respondent that has more than 500 employees.
(e) For the purposes of Subsection (d), in determining the number of employees of a respondent, the requisite number of employees must be employed by the respondent for each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year.
Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 76, Sec. 9.07(b), eff. Sept. 1, 1995. Amended by Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 872, Sec. 13, eff. Sept. 1, 1999.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 84
cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1997–2026 · leading case: Carleen Black v. Pan Am. Labs., 646 F.3d 254 (5th Cir. 2011).
Carleen Black v. Pan Am. Labs., 646 F.3d 254 (5th Cir. 2011). “2001) (the THRCA “damages limitation provision,” Tex. Labor Code § 21.2585, is “identical to that in [Title VII,] § 1981a(b)(3)”).”
Wackenhut Corr. Corp. v. De La Rosa, 305 S.W.3d 594 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2009). “Wackenhut argues that Shoreline is distinguishable because Texas Labor Code section 21.2585 requires the defendant to prove the number of employees it has in order to determine the cap amounts.”
Ancira Enter., Inc. v. Fischer, 178 S.W.3d 82 (Tex. App.—Austin 2005). “” 14 See Tex. Lab. Code Ann. § 21.2585 . The jury answered in the affirmative, and awarded $75,000.”
Fairfield Ins. Co. v. Stephens Martin Paving, LP, 246 S.W.3d 653 (Tex. 2008). “TEX. LAB.CODE § 21.2585. [60] See, e.g., TEX.”
O'DELL v. Wright, 320 S.W.3d 505 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2010). “Texas Labor Code Section 21.2585’s statutory cap In the remainder of his fourth issue, O’Dell argues that the trial court erred by entering judgment based on the jury’s finding of an award in excess of Texas Labor Code Section 21.”
San Antonio Water Sys. v. Debra Nicholas, 441 S.W.3d 382 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013). “Under both section 1981a and the Human Rights Act, a court may award compensatory damages upon finding that an employer has engaged in an unlawful intentional employment practice and may further award punitive damages when the discriminatory practice is with malice or reckless…”
Edwards v. Aaron Rents, Inc., 482 F. Supp. 2d 803 (W.D. Tex. 2006). “Finally, Plaintiff argues that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s award of back pay and that Defendant failed to raise offset as an affirmative defense, thereby waiving any claim to it.”
Arismendez v. Nightingale Home Health Care, Inc., 493 F.3d 602 (5th Cir. 2007). “Tex. Lab.Code § 21.2585. (1) Waiver Arismendez contends that the employer waived the statutory cap by failing to properly invoke it as an affirmative defense in district court.”
United Servs. Auto. Ass'n v. Brite, 161 S.W.3d 566 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2005). “064 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, which provides that "[t]he period between the date of filing an action in a trial court and the date of a second filing of the same action in a different court suspends the running of the applicable statute of limitations for…”
River Oaks L-M. Inc. D/B/A West Point Lincoln Mercury v. Veronica Vinton-Duarte, 469 S.W.3d 213 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2015). “See Tex. Labor Code Ann. § 21.2585 (West, Westlaw through 2013 3d C.”
Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. v. Brian Burnett, 552 S.W.3d 901 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2018). “Tex. Lab. Code Ann. § 21.2585 (a), (d)(4) (emphasis added).”
Cont'l Coffee Prods. Co. v. Cazarez, 937 S.W.2d 444 (Tex. 1997). “1335(b)(3) (resident of “institution” under Nursing and Convalescent Homes Chapter who is retaliated or discriminated against by an institution when the resident, his guardian, or any other person reports abuse or neglect is entitled to sue for exemplary damages); Tex.Lab.Code §…”
Tex. Lab. Code § 21.2585(a): 4 cases
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Davis, 979 S.W.2d 30 (Tex. App.—Austin 1998).
San Antonio Water Sys. v. Debra Nicholas, 441 S.W.3d 382 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013). “Under both section 1981a and the Human Rights Act, a court may award compensatory damages upon finding that an employer has engaged in an unlawful intentional employment practice and may further award punitive damages when the discriminatory practice is with malice or reckless…”
Jefferson Cnty., Texas v. Donna Davis, No. 14-13-00663-CV, 2014 WL 4262184 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] Aug. 28, 2014).
Jefferson Cnty., Texas v. Donna Davis, No. 14-1029 (Tex. May 13, 2015).
Tex. Lab. Code § 21.2585(a)(2): 3 cases
Cont'l Coffee Prods. Co. v. Cazarez, 937 S.W.2d 444 (Tex. 1997). “1335(b)(3) (resident of “institution” under Nursing and Convalescent Homes Chapter who is retaliated or discriminated against by an institution when the resident, his guardian, or any other person reports abuse or neglect is entitled to sue for exemplary damages); Tex.Lab.Code §…”
Tammie Ackelson v. Manley Toy Direct, L.L.C. & Toy Network, L.L.C. v. Manley Toy Direct, L.L.C.. & Toy Network, L.L.C., 832 N.W.2d 678 (Iowa 2013).
Safeshred, Inc. v. Martinez, 310 S.W.3d 649 (Tex. App.—Austin 2010).
Tex. Lab. Code § 21.2585(b): 7 cases
Tarrant Cnty. Hosp. Dist. v. Henry, 52 S.W.3d 434 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2001).
Safeshred, Inc. v. Martinez, 365 S.W.3d 655 (Tex. 2012).
Shear Cuts, Inc. v. Littlejohn, 141 S.W.3d 264 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2004).
West Telemarketing Corp. Outbound v. McClure, 225 S.W.3d 658 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2006).
Texas Dep't of Ins. v. Som Thomas, No. 15-24-00073-CV (Mar. 19, 2026).
Tex. Lab. Code § 21.2585(c): 2 cases
Haggar Apparel Co. v. Leal, 100 S.W.3d 303 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2002).
Texas Comm'n on Human Rights v. Morrison, 346 S.W.3d 838 (Tex. App.—Austin 2011).
Tex. Lab. Code § 21.2585(c)(1): 1 case
San Antonio Water Sys. v. Debra Nicholas, 441 S.W.3d 382 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013). “Under both section 1981a and the Human Rights Act, a court may award compensatory damages upon finding that an employer has engaged in an unlawful intentional employment practice and may further award punitive damages when the discriminatory practice is with malice or reckless…”
Tex. Lab. Code § 21.2585(c)(3): 1 case
San Antonio Water Sys. v. Debra Nicholas, 441 S.W.3d 382 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013). “Under both section 1981a and the Human Rights Act, a court may award compensatory damages upon finding that an employer has engaged in an unlawful intentional employment practice and may further award punitive damages when the discriminatory practice is with malice or reckless…”
Tex. Lab. Code § 21.2585(d): 18 cases
Carleen Black v. Pan Am. Labs., 646 F.3d 254 (5th Cir. 2011). “2001) (the THRCA “damages limitation provision,” Tex. Labor Code § 21.2585, is “identical to that in [Title VII,] § 1981a(b)(3)”).”
Mirta Zorrilla v. Aypco Constr. II, LLC & Jose Luis Munoz, 469 S.W.3d 143 (Tex. 2015).
Arismendez v. Nightingale Home Health Care, Inc., 493 F.3d 602 (5th Cir. 2007). “Tex. Lab.Code § 21.2585. (1) Waiver Arismendez contends that the employer waived the statutory cap by failing to properly invoke it as an affirmative defense in district court.”
Edwards v. Aaron Rents, Inc., 482 F. Supp. 2d 803 (W.D. Tex. 2006). “Finally, Plaintiff argues that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s award of back pay and that Defendant failed to raise offset as an affirmative defense, thereby waiving any claim to it.”
Shear Cuts, Inc. v. Littlejohn, 141 S.W.3d 264 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2004).
Tex. Lab. Code § 21.2585(d)(1): 3 cases
Williams-Pyro, Inc. v. Rhonda Barbour, 408 S.W.3d 467 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2013).
in Re Solid Software Solutions, Inc., D/B/A Edible Software, No. 01-15-00267-CV (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Mar. 24, 2015).
THF Hous. Mgmt. Corp. v. Kathleen Gideon, 617 S.W.3d 624 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2021).
Tex. Lab. Code § 21.2585(d)(4): 5 cases
United Servs. Auto. Ass'n v. Brite, 161 S.W.3d 566 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2005). “064 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, which provides that "[t]he period between the date of filing an action in a trial court and the date of a second filing of the same action in a different court suspends the running of the applicable statute of limitations for…”
Dillard Dep't Stores, Inc. v. Gonzales, 72 S.W.3d 398 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2002).
Union Pac. R.R. v. Loa, 153 S.W.3d 162 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2004).
San Antonio Water Sys. v. Debra Nicholas, 441 S.W.3d 382 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2013). “Under both section 1981a and the Human Rights Act, a court may award compensatory damages upon finding that an employer has engaged in an unlawful intentional employment practice and may further award punitive damages when the discriminatory practice is with malice or reckless…”
Napier v. Humana Marketpoint, Inc., 826 F. Supp. 2d 984 (N.D. Tex. 2011).
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.