CompFox AI Summary
Israel Hernandez, a 53-year-old employee, sued Grey Wolf Drilling, L.P. for age discrimination and retaliation under the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act (TCHRA) after his termination in 2007. Hernandez claimed his supervisor, John Jansen, repeatedly called him 'old man' and 'old fart' and fired him after he complained. The trial court granted Grey Wolf's no-evidence motion for summary judgment. On appeal, the court reviewed the decision de novo, applying the McDonnell Douglas-Burdine framework for pretext claims and explicitly rejecting the 'but for' test from Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc. The appellate court found Hernandez provided more than a scintilla of evidence for both his age discrimination and retaliation claims, thus reversing the trial court's summary judgment and remanding the case for further proceedings.
Hernandez v. Grey Wolf Drilling, L.P. is a workers' compensation case decided in Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio). This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio).
Full Decision Text1 Pages
Israel Hernandez, a 53-year-old employee, sued Grey Wolf Drilling, L.P. for age discrimination and retaliation under the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act (TCHRA) after his termination in 2007. Hernandez claimed his supervisor, John Jansen, repeatedly called him 'old man' and 'old fart' and fired him after he complained. The trial court granted Grey Wolf's no-evidence motion for summary judgment. On appeal, the court reviewed the decision de novo, applying the McDonnell Douglas-Burdine framework for pretext claims and explicitly rejecting the 'but for' test from Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc. The appellate court found Hernandez provided more than a scintilla of evidence for both his age discrimination and retaliation claims, thus reversing the trial court's summary judgment and remanding the case for further proceedings.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.