San Benito Consol. Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Cruz

SAN BENITO CONSOLIDATED INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, Appellant, v. MARIA CONCEPTION CRUZ, Appellee.

NUMBER 13-20-00310-CV

COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

March 11, 2021

On appeal from the 103rd District Court of Cameron County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Tijerina

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Contreras

Appellant San Benito Consolidated Independent School District (SBISD) appeals the denial of its plea to the jurisdiction in this employment discrimination suit brought by appellee Maria Conception Cruz.¹ By four issues, that we treat as one, SBISD argues the trial court erred when it denied its plea as to Cruz's age discrimination claim. We affirm.

I. BACKGROUND

In September 2017, SBISD hired Nate Carman as its superintendent. In October 2017, at the direction of Carman, SBISD hired Hector Madrigal as the new executive director of academics, and Madrigal became Cruz's new supervisor.² Carman and Madrigal had previously worked together. At the time Carman and Madrigal began working for SBISD, Cruz worked as the director of elementary instructional implementation, overseeing twelve elementary schools and their respective principals. Cruz had been employed in that position for the previous thirteen years and had worked for SBISD for an aggregate of twenty-seven years.³

Madrigal quickly became displeased with Cruz's job performance and expressed his dissatisfaction to her. According to Cruz, Madrigal informed her on January 12, 2018, that she was going to be moved from her role as director because three other directors told Madrigal they were having difficulty working with Cruz.

On February 7, 2018, Cruz filed complaints of age discrimination with the president of SBISD's board and with the Texas Workforce Commission (TWC). In her charge with the TWC, Cruz stated:

Since Mr. Madrigal was hired, I have been subjected to a discriminatory work environment based upon my age. Mr. Madrigal has shown favoritism toward younger employees than myself. Ms. Theresa Servellon, Secondary Director of Instructional Implementation, who is substantially younger than myself as is Hector Madrigal is alleged to have issues with me that are my creation according to Mr. Madrigal. On approximately November 15, 2017, Mr. Madrigal told me that I could not get along with Ms. Servellon and that "I better make it good or you're not going to like my decision."[⁴] Mr. Madrigal since his hiring has made my work environment a living hell as he has with other older employees that he supervises, such as Dr. Patricia Quesada, Mary Julia Trevino to name a few who are all well over 40 years of age. I met with Ms. Servellon and attempted to convey my good will and intentions as made clear by Mr. Madrigal, however, it was not to Mr. Madrigal or Ms. Servellon's satisfaction who are both substantially younger than myself. Subsequently afterwards, on January 12, 2018, Mr. Madrigal informed me that I would need to be moved and not to cry because there were 3 directors who didn't get along with me.[⁵]

On February 1, 2018, I decided to meet with Dr. Nate Carman regarding my complaints against Mr. Madrigal and his discriminatory treatment. The meeting lasted for approximately 1 hour. To my chagrin, after expecting Dr. Carman to assist me, he had prepared prior to meeting with him 3 options: (1) To write a resignation letter immediately that would take effect during the end of the 2018-2019 school year so that my title and salary would remain the same (2) To retire at the end of the 2017-2018 school year, and receive 2 additional months of pay, subject to board approval [or] (3) To remain an employee for the 2018-2019 school year to a demoted position as coordinator with significant less pay and responsibilities. I was given until February 19, 2018, to make my decision from the above 3 options. It must be noted that the option of staying in my current job without offering a resignation was not an option and I believe that the attempt to force my retirement is in itself, discriminatory based upon my age.

Furthermore, since the inception of Dr. Nate Carman as Superintendent, highly educated, skilled, and loyal female employees have been discriminated against. Ms. Linda McKinney, Payroll Clerk, Dr. Patricia Quesada, Ms. Mary Julia Trevino, and former employees Mary Alice Martinez and Margot Torres, have experienced gender discrimination whileDr. Carman has approved all of our demotions during the 2017-2018 school year that has approximately 4 months remaining of educational instruction.

I have always received excellent performance evaluations during my career. I have attended L. Central College, Texas Women's University, and graduated from Southern Methodist University with a Master's in Education. I grew up in the Rio Grande Valley and decided to return and serve the community after I was educated.

On April 14, 2018, Cruz amended her charge with the TWC and added a complaint for retaliation.

On May 4, 2018, a report from SBISD's internal investigation found Cruz had not been discriminated against based on her age because she had not suffered an adverse employment action. On May 24, 2018, Cruz appealed the result of the investigation and simultaneously filed a formal complaint form with Carman.

In June 2018, Madrigal gave Cruz a "Professional Performance Appraisal," assessing her "knowledge of programs" and "punctuality of reports" as "below expectations" and included a comment that "Cruz had to be reminded several times about due dates."⁶ On June 19, 2018, Carman wrote a letter to Cruz advising her that she would be assigned to the lower position of Title 1 Coordinator for the next school year (2018-2019), beginning on July 2, 2018. Cruz was sixty-eight years old at the time. On June 25, 2018, Carman wrote a letter to Olivia Flores advising her that she would be assigned to Cruz's former position as director of elementary instruction for the next school year (2018-2019), beginning on July 2, 2018. Flores was sixty-seven years of age at the time and a principal at one of the elementary schools Cruz oversaw as a director.

On June 26, 2018, Cruz again amended her charge with the TWC to add:

On June 19, 2018, [SBISD] has continued its aggression and retaliation concerning my employment. I was informed in writing that my position would become Title I Coordinator. This position is completely different than my previous position Director of Elementary Instructional Implementation. Also, I have been informed that my salary will be "adjusted" during the 2019-2020 school year. Adjusted means I will be making less salary after the 2018-2019 school year. Additionally, this is an adverse employment action because my salary will be affected and reassigned to a different job classification that is a demotion. Lastly, my employer has provided a poor evaluation after my opposition to workplace discrimination from a professional performance evaluation conducted by Hector Madrigal. It is the lowest score and evaluation in my 27 years of employment with [SBISD]. I was provided with two categories of below expectation and a negative comment that I had to be reminded several times about due dates. I deny the assertions that I am not knowledgeable of the programs and am not punctual regarding my reports.

I am asking the Texas Workforce Commission; Division of Civil Rights to investigate my claim of age discrimination and retaliation in violation of [§] 21.051 and [§] 21.055 of the Texas Labor Code.

On August 8, 2018, Cruz amended her TWC complaint and added that she had been officially reassigned. In October 2018, the TWC issued Cruz a right to sue letter.

The following year, on July 6, 2019, Carman reassigned Flores back to a principal position at an elementary school for the upcoming year (2019-2020), beginning on July 17, 2019. Flores was replaced as director of elementary instructional implementation by another elementary school principal, Dilia Cornett. Cornett was forty-nine years old.

In November 2019, Cruz filed suit against SBISD for age discrimination and for retaliation. Cruz's petition largely mirrored her most recent charge with TWC, except she added that she "was replaced by a younger and less qualified employee" and that her "replacement was selected after [Cruz] filed her discrimination complaint on February 7, 2018."

SBISD filed a combined motion for summary judgment and plea to the jurisdiction arguing that Cruz had failed to present evidence supporting a prima facie case as to her age discrimination and retaliation claims. Specifically, as to the age discrimination claim, SBISD argued that: (1) Cruz's pleadings failed to establish a prima facie case because she was replaced by Flores, who was less than two years younger than Cruz; and (2) SBISD had legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for Cruz's reassignment. Cruz filed a response arguing that her true replacement was Cornett, not Flores, and that there was a fact issue as to whether SBISD's proffered reasons were a pretext for age discrimination. Cruz attached excerpts of depositions of herself, Carman, Madrigal, Flores, Servellon, and the former director of human resources for SBISD, Kevin Phillips.

After a hearing, the trial court granted SBISD's summary judgment motion and plea to jurisdiction as to Cruz's retaliation claim but denied it as to her age discrimination claim. This interlocutory appeal followed.⁷ See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 51.014(a)(8) (providing for interlocutory appeal from a trial court's order on a plea to the jurisdiction).

II. DISCUSSION

By its sole issue, SBISD argues the trial court erred when it denied its plea to the jurisdiction as to Cruz's age discrimination claim.

A. Standard of Review

A plea to the jurisdiction is a dilatory plea used to defeat a cause of action without regard to whether the claims asserted have merit. Bland Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 547, 554 (Tex. 2000)....