Dallas Employment Trial Lawyer Riley Carter
When an employer crosses the line from negligent to malicious, punitive damages are one of the most powerful tools an employee has. But the statute you sue under can mean the difference between a $50,000 ceiling and an unlimited verdict. Here’s a quick guide to how punitive damages work in Texas employment cases under federal and state law.
Federal Law: Title VII vs. § 1981
Dallas Senior Trial Attorney Deontae Wherry
The Supreme Court has once again reshaped the landscape of Civil Rights in America, and the implications could reach far beyond the ballot box. In a decision that effectively guts a key pillar of the Voting Rights Act, the Court has signaled that states are now free to dilute the voting power of racial minorities through gerrymandering so long as they call it “partisanship” instead of “racial bias.”
It is one more example of a Court’s intent on stepping back from its role in protecting minority groups from majority overreach. The maps will still be drawn to silence minorities. The harm will still fall on the same communities. The only difference is the label on the package.
Dallas Employment Trial Lawyer Riley Carter
Members of the military and uniformed services make extraordinary sacrifices in service to our country. Federal law recognizes that those sacrifices should not come at the cost of a civilian career. The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) is designed to protect service members and veterans from discrimination, retaliation, and unlawful job loss related to their military service.
At Rob Wiley, P.C., we regularly represent employees whose rights have been violated after they served—or continued to serve—in the military. Understanding the basics of USERRA is the first step in protecting those rights.
Dallas Employment Trial Lawyer Cassidy Monska
If you traveled recently, you probably noticed it. Airport security lines wrapping around terminals. Missed flights. Frustrated travelers staring at their phones and wondering how getting through TSA suddenly felt like a test of endurance.
While the long lines grabbed headlines, the real story was not about travel. It was about workers.
Dallas Employment Trial Lawyer Cassidy Monska
Summary: This blog explains the “cat’s paw” theory of liability in employment law, which allows an employee to hold an employer accountable when a biased supervisor influences an otherwise neutral decision‑maker to take adverse action.
One of the most frustrating things employees hear after being fired or disciplined is that the person who made the final decision “wasn’t biased.” Employers often rely on that fact to argue they cannot be held responsible for discrimination or retaliation. Employment law, however, recognizes that bias does not always sit at the top of the organizational chart. This is where the “cat’s paw” theory of liability comes into play.
Summary: This article discusses a recent Sixth Circuit decision, Bruce v. Adams & Reese, which held that the EFAA prohibits employers from splitting up a case that has claims other than sexual harassment/assault. That is, if the case has claims exempted from arbitration under the EFAA, the whole case can go to court as one.
As previously discussed elsewhere in this blog, in 2022 the Biden administration signed the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (“EFAA”) into law. This law made it clear that employers were no longer allowed to force employees to “hide” any sexual harassment and assault claims in private, confidential arbitration (where typically the decisionmaker is paid by the employer) instead of being allowed to go to court. This law was very important for workers because – beyond the fact employers could no longer conceal whether they had been sued for sexual harassment – in general arbitrations favor employers over employees. The law thus let workers keep their cases in more favorable venues, the courts.
One thing that old article noted that was less than clear was the question of what happened if an employee brought sexual harassment claims in addition to other legal claims – could those other claims be forcibly separated out and put into arbitration anyway? Some lower courts across the country have looked at the issue, but those are not binding precedents. On February 25, 2026, however, a Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decision reached a definite answer – and that answer is no. In a case involving claims protected by the EFAA, everything can stay together in court.
Dallas Employment Trial Lawyer Riley Carter
In civil litigation, liability is only half the story. Even when a defendant is clearly at fault, the amount of damages recoverable by a plaintiff is often shaped by a less-discussed but critically important principle: the duty to mitigate damages.
Understanding this doctrine is essential for litigators, clients, and courts alike, because it limits recovery without excusing wrongdoing—and frequently becomes a battleground at trial.
You may have seen headlines saying the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has “rescinded” its workplace harassment guidance, especially guidance relating to LGBTQ+ employees. If that raised alarm bells for you, you’re not alone. Many Texas employees are wondering: Does this mean harassment is suddenly okay? Did my protections disappear?
The short answer is no. But the longer answer matters and understanding what actually changed (and what didn’t) can help you protect yourself at work.
What happened?
Around St. Patrick’s Day, conversations about drinking are everywhere. But when alcohol use becomes a medical issue, the legal questions are anything but lighthearted. Many Texas employees quietly ask the same thing: Can I lose my job for being an alcoholic?
The answer is more nuanced than most people realize – and it depends on what actually happened at work.
Is Alcoholism a Disability Under the ADA?
Dallas Employment Trial Lawyer Cassidy Monska
Across the country, nurses are taking action in ways the public has not seen in years. News headlines often describe these strikes as pay disputes, but nurses consistently tell a different story. The real issue is safety. Unsafe staffing. Unsafe patient loads. Unsafe working conditions that place both patients and employees at risk. Nurses are speaking out because caring has become unsafe, and they are being pushed past the point where quiet endurance is possible.
For years, nurses were told that chronic staffing shortages were temporary. They were asked to hold on until the next hiring wave or the next budget cycle. Instead, the environment inside many hospitals has grown even more strained. Nurses are regularly responsible for more patients than they can safely manage. Overtime becomes the rule rather than the exception. Breaks disappear. New nurses leave the profession within months, and experienced nurses shoulder more responsibilities with fewer resources. Many report working entire shifts without time to chart properly, hydrate, or use the restroom. This is not sustainable for anyone, and it certainly is not safe.
Dallas Employment Lawyer Blog