Fort Worth ISD\u2019s new Board of Managers has inherited a 14-year whistleblower lawsuit after the district lost its latest attempt to end the case.<\/p>\n
Attorneys for former administrator Joseph Palazzolo are questioning whether district officials briefed the state-appointed board on the litigation or whether the board gave new instructions on how to proceed.<\/p>\n
The Second Court of Appeals affirmed<\/a> a Wise County judge\u2019s denial of FWISD\u2019s plea to the jurisdiction on August 13, 2026, in former administrator Joseph Palazzolo\u2019s Texas Whistleblower Act case. The appellate court did not decide whether FWISD retaliated against Palazzolo. It held that unresolved factual disputes remain for a jury, although FWISD can still seek further appellate review.<\/p>\n The litigation is now under a governing body that did not exist when most of the case unfolded. As previously reported<\/a> by The Dallas Express, the Texas Education Agency appointed<\/a> nine managers on March 24, 2026, temporarily replacing the elected trustees\u2019 governing authority.<\/p>\n Was the new board briefed?<\/p>\n In a May 25, 2026, filing<\/a>, Palazzolo\u2019s attorneys argued that the new managers \u201chad not been briefed regarding the present case, nor had an opportunity to consider settlement.\u201d The filing was a reply supporting a motion asking the appellate court to require outside attorney Thomas Brandt to brief the managers and obtain affirmative instructions from the new governing body.<\/p>\n Palazzolo\u2019s reply says FWISD argued that Brandt had authority to pursue the appeal based on communications with district in-house counsel. The reply quotes FWISD Staff Attorney Alexander Athanason as stating, \u201cI have communicated those case updates to Fort Worth ISD Leadership and Fort Worth ISD Board Counsel.\u201d Palazzolo\u2019s attorneys argued that the statement did not establish that the managers themselves had been briefed.<\/p>\n That is Palazzolo\u2019s attorneys\u2019 position, not a court finding. The filings dispute whether the managers themselves must provide new authorization to outside counsel. The filing does not establish whether the managers have received a briefing since then, and the August 13 appellate opinion does not address the separate authority dispute.<\/p>\n The former elected board had previously authorized the superintendent to pursue a settlement. On December 10, 2024, trustees voted 8-0 to authorize the superintendent to negotiate and finalize a settlement in Palazzolo v. Fort Worth ISD under terms discussed in closed session, according to official minutes<\/a>.<\/p>\n The litigation remained unresolved when the state-appointed managers assumed control more than a year later.<\/p>\n A case stretching back to 2012<\/p>\n Palazzolo sued FWISD in July 2012, alleging that district officials retaliated against him for reporting suspected violations of law while he worked as an assistant principal at Arlington Heights High School. His reports included allegations that administrators were falsifying student attendance records.<\/p>\n