Dr. Leonard Bright v. Texas A&M University

Court of Appeals Tenth Appellate District of Texas 10-22-00282-CV Dr. Leonard Bright, Appellant v. Texas A&M University, Appellee On appeal from the 272nd District Court of Brazos County, Texas Judge John L. Brick, presiding Trial Court Cause No. 20-000811-CV-272 CHIEF JUSTICE JOHNSON delivered the opinion of the Court. MEMORANDUM OPINION Dr. Leonard Bright appeals from the trial court’s order granting Texas A&M University’s plea to the jurisdiction. We will affirm. I. Background Dr. Bright is a tenured associate professor in the Department of Public Service and Administration (PSAA) in the Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University (TAMU). In May 2018, Dr. Bright applied for promotion to full professor in the Bush School. His promotion application was denied, and he filed suit against TAMU alleging causes of action for racial discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment. A. TAMU Promotion Process TAMU University Rule 12.01.99.M2 University Statement on Academic Freedom, Responsibility, Tenure, and Promotion sets out the policies for promotion at TAMU. Section 4.4 of that Rule designates the categories of performance as (1) teaching, (2) scholarship or research and its publication, and (3) service. Section 4.4.2 of the Rule allows the faculty and administrators of each college to develop written guidelines describing the evaluation criteria employed in the unit consistent with TAMU criteria and procedures. Section 4.4.3.3 provides that in addition to criteria developed in the college, the minimum requirements to be met by individuals being considered for promotion to full professor are (1) continuing accomplishment in teaching, (2) continuing accomplishment and some measure of national or international recognition in research or another form of creative activity, and (3) evidence of valuable professional service. The Bush School at TAMU provided Submission Guidelines for those seeking promotion. The Guidelines detail the required contents of the candidate’s dossier as well as the multi-level review process. The dossier includes documents submitted by the candidate, external peer-review letters, Bright v. Texas A&M Univ. Page 2 and reports prepared by the various voting bodies—departmental promotion and tenure committee, department head, college promotion and tenure committee, and dean. The candidate submits a possible list of external reviewers, and the P&T committee also provides a list of possible reviewers. A group of at least seven external reviewers are selected. After receiving the external reviews and the documents provided by the candidate, the review process begins. • The first level of review is the department P&T committee recommendation. The department P&T committee reviews the candidate’s dossier, creates a report, and then makes a recommendation on whether or not to promote the candidate. • The second level of review is by the department head who notifies the candidate of the department P&T committee’s recommendation. The department head reviews the dossier, prepares a report, and then makes a recommendation. The department head notifies the candidate upon submission of the recommendation to the dean. • The third level of review is by the college P&T committee. The college P&T committee prepares a report and recommendation on promotion. The college dean notifies the department head that the Bright v. Texas A&M Univ. Page 3  college P&T committee has reached a decision, and the department head notifies the candidate. • The fourth level of review is by the dean of the college. The dean reviews the dossier, prepares a report, and makes an independent determination on the candidate’s promotion. The dean of the college notifies the department head upon submission of the recommendation to the Provost, and the department head notifies the candidate. • The fifth level of review is by the Provost. The Provost reviews the dossier and makes a recommendation. The dean of faculties notifies the department head who then notifies the candidate. • The sixth level of review is b