City of Fort Worth v. DeOreo
114 S.W.3d 664, 2003 WL 21770494, 2003 Tex. App. LEXIS 6627 (2003)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Reporting a fellow police officer's off-duty criminal conduct is a protected activity under the Texas Whistleblower Act because a police officer's duty to obey and enforce the law is a 24-hour official duty. Subsequent adverse employment actions that would not have occurred but for the protected report can constitute unlawful retaliation leading to a constructive discharge.
Facts:
- Cynthia DeOreo was employed as a police officer for the City of Fort Worth.
- In May 1996, DeOreo reported her ex-husband, Tim Harkrider, who was also a Fort Worth police officer, to the police department for aggravated kidnaping.
- Following the report, Harkrider pled guilty to felony false imprisonment and was discharged from the police department.
- Harkrider was friends with Ralph Mendoza, who was appointed chief of police in August 1999.
- After Mendoza became chief, DeOreo's supervisor, Captain Baldwin, repeatedly told her she had a "stigma attached to [her] because of Tim Harkrider."
- DeOreo was subjected to a series of adverse actions, including being forced to work longer than her peers during an emergency, being denied compensatory time granted to others, having her harassment complaint against another officer improperly handled, and being given a false reason for the denial of her transfer request.
- In June 2000, DeOreo resigned from the police department due to the working conditions.
Procedural Posture:
- Cynthia DeOreo sued the City of Fort Worth in trial court, alleging violations of the Texas Whistleblower Act, sexual harassment, and retaliation for opposing sex discrimination.
- The City of Fort Worth filed a motion for summary judgment on all claims.
- The trial court granted partial summary judgment for the City, dismissing DeOreo's sexual harassment and discrimination claims, but allowing the whistleblower claim to proceed.
- Following a bench trial on the whistleblower claim, the trial court found in favor of DeOreo and entered a judgment against the City of Fort Worth for damages and reinstatement.
- The City of Fort Worth, as appellant, appealed the trial court's judgment to the Court of Appeals of Texas.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does reporting a fellow police officer's off-duty criminal conduct constitute a protected activity under the Texas Whistleblower Act, thereby making subsequent adverse employment actions that create intolerable working conditions a basis for a constructive discharge claim?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Sam J. Day
Yes, reporting a fellow police officer's off-duty criminal conduct is a protected activity, and the subsequent adverse actions were sufficient to support a finding of constructive discharge. The court reasoned that police officers have a 24-hour duty to obey and enforce the law, making an off-duty crime a violation of the officer's official duties. Therefore, DeOreo's report of Harkrider's felony was a protected report of a violation of law to an appropriate authority under the Whistleblower Act. The court found sufficient evidence to establish a causal link between this report and the subsequent adverse employment actions, concluding that the actions would not have occurred 'but for' the report. The cumulative effect of these actions, including harassment, disparate treatment, and deception by a supervisor, created conditions so intolerable that a reasonable person would have felt compelled to resign, thus constituting a constructive discharge.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies that the scope of the Texas Whistleblower Act's protection for law enforcement officers is not confined to on-duty conduct. By defining a police officer's duty to uphold the law as a 24-hour obligation, the court significantly broadened the types of reports that qualify for protection. This precedent strengthens protections for officers who report misconduct by their colleagues, even if the misconduct occurs in a personal, off-duty context. It signals that internal affairs and departmental culture must not penalize officers for fulfilling their fundamental duty to report criminal acts, regardless of when or where they occur.
