Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Fields v. Teamsters Local Union No. 988

Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)

Decided July 20, 2000No. 01-99-00304-CVPublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partMargaret Garner Mirabal, Justice

Appellant Maria Fields brought suit under two sections of the Texas Labor Code: section 21.051 prohibits sexual harassment and gender discrimination by an “employer,” and section 21.055 prohibits retaliation by an “employer” or a labor union against a person who files a complaint under chapter 21. Appellant also sued for intentional infliction of emotional distress.

The majority opinion affirms summary judgment for the labor union as to the cause of action under section 21.051 of the Texas Labor Code. I dissent from this holding because the summary judgment evidence raises a fact issue about…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Trevino v. Celanese Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983
  2. Freddy Garcia v. Elf Atochem North America, D/B/A Ozark Mahoney & Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1994
  3. Jeanne P. Herman v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local Union No. 971Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
  4. Maxwell v. KightDistrict Court, E.D. Texas · 1996

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API