Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, PROCEDURE—N.D. Tex.: Nurse’s employment case against Texas state hospital limited by sovereign immunity, (Jun 8, 2026)

By Steven Melendez

A federal court dismissed some claims based on sovereign immunity and dismissed others without prejudice based on failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

A federal court granted in part a motion to dismiss employment claims brought by a registered nurse against the University of Texas Southwest Medical Center (UTSW), citing sovereign immunity and failure to exhaust administrative remedies via filings with the EEOC. Race-related claims brought under Title VII and Texas state law were allowed to proceed (Willie v. University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, No. 3:25-CV-3235-B (N.D. Tex. June 3, 2026)).

Onerous working conditions. The nurse alleged that UTSW constructively discharged her from her role as a quality-assurance registered nurse (QAN) by imposing onerous working conductions. She also alleged that as an African-American woman, she was paid about 40 to 46 percent less than white QANs despite performing substantially equal work.

In addition, she alleged her direct supervisor relegated her to administrative and clerical tasks while white colleagues got more “professional-level” tasks, excluded her from communications and meetings, denied her professional-development opportunities that were open to white coworkers, and criticized and humiliated her in front of peers. She claimed that reporting that behavior to HR only made things worse, as she was given more work than she could reasonably handle, forced to work 16-18 hour days while her white colleagues could finish their own assigned tasks in a normal workday. She also alleged she faced increased scrutiny and false accusations.

She brought up the concerns to UTSW’s Equal Employment and Title IX office, but again, this allegedly only made things worse. UTSW also allegedly knew she had lupus, a condition that was aggravated by stress, and she was ultimately hospitalized after her working conditions caused a lupus flare-up.

She filed a charge of discrimination with the EEOC and received a right to sue notice. In late 2025, she sued in Texas state court, alleging violations of Title VII, the ADA, the Texas Commission on Human Rights Act (TCHRA), Equal Pay Act (EPA), 42 U.S.C. § 1981, the FMLA, and negligent retention and supervision of her supervisor. UTSW filed an answer in state court, then removed to federal court, where in March 2026, it filed a motion to dismiss.

Sovereign immunity. UTSW argued that, as it is a legal arm of Texas, sovereign immunity bars claims under the TCHRA, ADA, and FMLA, as well as the claim of negligence.

The court found that while Texas has waived immunity from TCHRA suits in state court but not federal court, Fifth Circuit precedent holds that a state waives immunity in federal court for state-law claims where it has waived immunity in state court when it removes such claims to federal court.

But the Supreme Court and Fifth Circuit have repeatedly held that state sovereign immunity does bar suits against states by private citizens seeking money under Title I of the ADA, the court found. And while the Ex parte Young doctrine allows injunctive relief in suits against an officer of the state, the suit was brought against UTSW, not an officer, so the ADA claims were barred by sovereign immunity, the court found.

Similarly, the Supreme Court has found that FMLA claims against a state related to leave to take care of one’s own medical condition do not overcome sovereign immunity, the court stated, disallowing that claim. The 42 U.S.C. § 1981 claim was also barred by sovereign immunity, since neither Congress nor Texas has done anything to remove that immunity, according to the ruling.

UTSW also argued that the negligent retention and supervision claims were barred by sovereign immunity, since the Texas Tort Claims Act does not waive sovereign immunity for negligence claims. The court agreed, citing precedent on the issue, and dismissed the claim.

EPA and disparate treatment. UTSW argued the nurse failed to allege a plausible EPA claim since those are limited to disparities on the basis of sex, and she only alleged she was paid less than white, not male, coworkers. The court agreed, dismissing the claim without prejudice.

With regard to Title VII and TCHRA race-related claims, UTSW argued she did not adequately allege comparators, though the nurse argued that was not yet necessary at this stage of proceedings. The court agreed, finding she had adequately alleged discrimination based on her race, allowing those claims to proceed.

EEOC charge. UTSW also argued the nurse’s disability discrimination claim and constructive discharge theory under the TCHRA and Title VII should be dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies via the EEOC. The court found the nurse failed to mention lupus in her EEOC discrimination charge, and since her “disability-based claims cannot reasonably be expected to grow out of the Charge, she has failed to exhaust her administrative remedies for those claims,” according to the court ruling.

Similarly, the charge does not mention her ultimate resignation from UTSW or “indicate any desire to resign from her position,” the court found, similarly impairing her constructive discharge claim.

The court dismissed these claims without prejudice, giving her 21 days to amend the complaint to address the issues with these claims and the EPA claim.

The case is No. 3:25-CV-3235-B.

Judge: Boyle, J.

Attorneys: John L Pittman, III (Law Offices of John Pittman III) for Tawuana Willie. Alex Boykin, Office of the Attorney General, for The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center.

Cases: Procedure RaceDiscrimination DisabilityDiscrimination EmployeeLeave StateLawClaims Discrimination TexasNews