Kingsaire, Inc. d/b/a Kings Aire, Inc. v. Jorge Melendez

Summary

Justice Eva M. Guzman concurred in the Texas Supreme Court’s decision holding that Jorge Melendez failed to prove a retaliatory-discharge claim under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act. The concurrence explains that uniform enforcement of a reasonable leave policy is an inferential rebuttal defense, not an affirmative defense, and that the employee retains the burden to prove causation and disprove the employer’s leave-policy explanation. It also addresses the treatment of that defense in legal-sufficiency review and jury-charge proceedings.

Holdings

1. When an employer produces evidence that an adverse employment action resulted from uniform enforcement of a reasonable leave policy, the employee must prove the elements of retaliation and disprove that termination was based on the leave policy.
2. Uniform enforcement of a reasonable leave policy is an inferential rebuttal defense, not an affirmative defense, because it rebuts the causation element of the employee's retaliatory-discharge claim rather than avoiding liability after all elements are proved.
3. An inferential rebuttal defense cannot be submitted to the jury through a separate jury question; it must be presented through jury instructions.

Questions Presented

1. Whether uniform enforcement of a reasonable leave policy is an inferential rebuttal defense to a retaliatory-discharge claim under the Texas Workers' Compensation Act.
2. Whether the employee bears the burden of disproving that termination resulted from uniform enforcement of a reasonable leave policy.
3. Whether the trial court erred by refusing to submit a separate jury question on the leave-policy defense.
4. Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to support the jury's retaliatory-discharge finding.

Disposition

other