Stephens v. Dallas Area Rapid Transit
Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Opinion by
Justice LAGARDE.
Curtis Stephens sued Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) for wrongful discharge under section 451.001 of the labor code, which prohibits retaliation against workers who file workers’ compensation claims. See Tex.Lab.Code Ann. § 451.001 (Vernon 1996). He appeals the trial court’s take nothing judgment in favor of DART. In five points of error, appellant contends the trial court erred by: (1) ruling that the substantial evidence standard applied to the appeal of his grievance and his wrongful discharge claim; (2) denying his request to introduce additional evidence…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- North East Independent School District v. AldridgeTexas Supreme Court · 1966
- Holland v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1999
- Texas Education Agency v. LeeperTexas Supreme Court · 1995
- East Line & Red River Railroad v. ScottTexas Supreme Court · 1888
- Webb v. JornsTexas Supreme Court · 1972
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Martin K. Eby Construction Company, Inc. v. Dallas Area Rapid TransitCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2004
- Dallas Area Rapid Transit v. Amalgamated Transit Union Local No. 1338Texas Supreme Court · 2008
- Gunnerman v. Basic Capital Management, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2003
- Calstar Properties, L.L.C. v. City of Fort WorthCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2004
- Castro v. Cammerino, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2006
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.