Muammer David Oksuz v. Harmony Public Schools

No. 03-25-00325-CV (Tex. App.—Austin Mar. 11, 2026) · Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, at Austin · March 11, 2026 · No. 03-25-00325-CV

Summary

The Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, reversed the trial court’s dismissal of Muammer David Oksuz’s employment-discrimination suit against Harmony Public Schools. The court held that Oksuz raised a fact issue as to whether the Gulen movement constituted a bona fide religious belief supporting a religious-discrimination claim under the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act. The court also held that the trial court erred by dismissing Oksuz’s retaliation claim because Harmony had not sought dismissal of that claim, and remanded for further proceedings.

Court
Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, at Austin
Writing for the Court
Rosa Lopez Theofanis; Justices Triana; Justice Kelly; Justice Rosa Lopez Theofanis
Jurisdiction
Texas Court of Appeals, Third District, Austin
Decision date
March 11, 2026
Docket number
03-25-00325-CV
Procedural posture
Oksuz appealed an order granting Harmony Public Schools' plea to the jurisdiction and dismissing all of his employment-discrimination and retaliation claims with prejudice for lack of jurisdiction.
Standard of review
The court reviewed the plea to the jurisdiction de novo. Because Harmony challenged the existence of jurisdictional facts with supporting evidence, the standard mirrored traditional summary judgment: Oksuz had to raise at least a genuine issue of material fact to overcome the jurisdictional challenge. The court credited evidence favorable to Oksuz and drew reasonable inferences in his favor.
Precedential value
The opinion is labeled a memorandum opinion. The supplied metadata identifies it as published, but no reporter or neutral citation appears in the source text.
Parties
Muammer David Oksuz v. Harmony Public Schools
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded

Topics

religious discriminationcivil rightsappellate procedurestandard of reviewcivil procedure

Practice areas

employment lawcivil rightscivil procedureappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Oksuz raised a genuine issue of material fact that the Gulen or Hizmet movement and his beliefs concerning it constituted a bona fide religious belief capable of supporting a prima facie religious-discrimination claim under the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act.
  2. Whether the trial court erred by dismissing Oksuz's retaliation claim when Harmony's plea to the jurisdiction and alternative summary-judgment motion did not challenge that claim.

Holdings

  1. Oksuz raised a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the Gulen movement constituted a bona fide religious belief and therefore could support a prima facie religious-discrimination claim under the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act. The trial court erred by granting Harmony's plea to the jurisdiction on that claim.
  2. The trial court erred by dismissing Oksuz's retaliation claim because Harmony did not challenge the pleadings or jurisdictional facts concerning that claim and expressly stated that it was not addressing retaliation.

Key quotations

The Texas Commission on Human Rights Act (TCHRA), comprising Chapter 21 of the Labor Code, provides a limited waiver of immunity from suit “only when the Plaintiff actually states a claim for conduct that would violate the TCHRA.” (4)
The evidence described above raises a fact issue as to whether the Gulen movement, to which Oksuz no longer adheres, constitutes a bona fide religious belief such that it may support a prima facie case for religious discrimination under the TCHRA. (8)
Dismissing Oksuz’s retaliation claim without first requiring Harmony to assert that the trial court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction was error. (9)

Factual background

Oksuz worked for Harmony Public Schools from 2009 until his termination on February 10, 2023, eventually serving as District Technology Coordinator for Central Texas. He alleged that after distancing himself from the Gulen or Hizmet movement, which he regarded as a religious movement, Harmony transferred him to a dead-end position, rejected several job applications, and terminated him, replacing him or hiring others who remained affiliated with the movement. He asserted claims for religious discrimination and retaliation under the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act.

Procedural history

Oksuz sued Harmony under the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act for religious discrimination and retaliation. Harmony filed a plea to the jurisdiction and, alternatively, a motion for partial traditional summary judgment, challenging only the religious-discrimination claim. The trial court granted the plea and dismissed all claims. After the trial court overruled Oksuz's motion for reconsideration by operation of law, Oksuz appealed.

Remand instructions

The cause was remanded to the 201st District Court of Travis County for further proceedings on Oksuz's claims.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…