Tex. Occ. Code § 301.352

Protection For Refusal To Engage In Certain Conduct

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 301.352. PROTECTION FOR REFUSAL TO ENGAGE IN CERTAIN CONDUCT. (a) A person may not suspend, terminate, or otherwise discipline, discriminate against, or retaliate against:

(1) a nurse who refuses to engage in an act or omission as provided by Subsection (a-1); or

(2) a person who advises a nurse of the nurse's rights under this section.

(a-1) A nurse may refuse to engage in an act or omission relating to patient care that would constitute grounds for reporting the nurse to the board under Subchapter I, that constitutes a minor incident, or that violates this chapter or a board rule if the nurse notifies the person at the time of the refusal that the reason for refusing is that the act or omission:

(1) constitutes grounds for reporting the nurse to the board; or

(2) is a violation of this chapter or a rule of the board.

(b) An act by a person under Subsection (a) does not constitute a violation of this section if a nursing peer review committee under Chapter 303 determines:

(1) that the act or omission the nurse refused to engage in was not:

(A) conduct reportable to the board under Section 301.403;

(B) a minor incident; or

(2) that:

(A) the act or omission in which the nurse refused to engage was conduct reportable to the board, a minor incident, or a violation of this chapter or a board rule; and

(B) the person:

(i) rescinds any disciplinary or discriminatory action taken against the nurse;

(ii) compensates the nurse for lost wages; and

(iii) restores to the nurse any lost benefits.

(d) An appropriate licensing agency may take action against a person who violates this section.

(e) Repealed by Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. 803, Sec. 21(2), eff. September 1, 2007.

(f) A violation of this section is subject to Section 301.413.

Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 388, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1999. Amended by Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 553, Sec. 1.028, eff. Sept. 1, 2003.

Amended by:

Acts 2005, 79th Leg., Ch. 113 (S.B. 1000), Sec. 7, eff. May 20, 2005.

Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. 803 (S.B. 993), Sec. 3, eff. September 1, 2007.

Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. 803 (S.B. 993), Sec. 21(2), eff. September 1, 2007.

Acts 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., Ch. 877 (S.B. 192), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2011.

Acts 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., Ch. 878 (S.B. 193), Sec. 3, eff. September 1, 2011.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 2013–2018 · leading case: Castillo v. Brownsville-Valley Regional Medical Center, Inc.

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Castillo v. Brownsville-Valley Regional Medical Center, Inc. (2013) texapp · cites it 2× “See Tex. Occ.Code Ann. § 301.352 (West 2012); see also Act of May 20, 2009, 81st Leg.”

Almeida v. Bio-Medical Applications of Tex., Inc. (2018) ca5 · cites it 2× “5 But that conclusion is irrelevant to which state's law governs Fresenius's termination of the nurses, whose claim is that Fresenius violated Texas Occupational Code §§ 301.352, 301.4025(b), and 301.”

Ramiro Castillo, Rogelio Garza Jr., Stephanie v. Gonzalez, Brenda Saenz, Lynda Valdez, Cleofe Vasquez, and Juan M. Vela (2013) texapp “See TEX. OCC. CODE ANN. § 301.352(a), (a)-(1); see also Act of May 20, 2009, 81st Leg.”

— Tex. Occ. Code § 301.352(a) — 1 case

— Tex. Occ. Code § 301.352(a)(1) — 1 case

Almeida v. Bio-Medical Applications of Tex., Inc. (2018) ca5 “5 But that conclusion is irrelevant to which state's law governs Fresenius's termination of the nurses, whose claim is that Fresenius violated Texas Occupational Code §§ 301.352, 301.4025(b), and 301.”

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.