U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 2026

Surface v. Pacillas

Surface v. Pacillas
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided August 6, 2026
Surface v. Pacillas

Opinion

Case: 25-50786 Document: 55-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/06/2026

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

No. 25-50786 FILED August 6, 2026 ____________ Lyle W. Cayce John Surface; Adan Chavez, Clerk Plaintiffs—Appellants, versus Pete Pacillas, individually and as Chief of Police of the El Paso Police Department; City of El Paso, Defendants—Appellees. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:24-CV-226 ______________________________ Before Stewart, Graves, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:* Two female officers in the El Paso Police Department—Rose Ibarbo and Ashley Pagitt—accused two supervisory officers of sexual harassment.

Ibarbo and Pagitt alleged that, for years, Lieutenant John Surface had conditioned favorable treatment on submitting to his sexual advances. And Ibarbo alleged that Sergeant Adan Chavez sent her text messages soliciting Case: 25-50786 Document: 55-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/06/2026

No. 25-50786 sexual favors on Surface’s behalf. Those allegations sparked an investigation that led to both officers’ arrests and terminations.

This is not a lawsuit by Ibarbo or Pagitt. Instead, Surface and Chavez bring a discrimination and retaliation lawsuit under Title VII, and various constitutional provisions. They allege that their terminations were discriminatory, and in retaliation for what they claim is protected conduct.

After discovery, the district court granted summary judgment.

We have reviewed the district-court briefing, the complaint, the record, and the appellate briefing. After hearing oral argument, we agree with the district court that no rational jury could find for plaintiffs on any of their claims. Because no genuine dispute of material fact remains, we AFFIRM summary judgment.

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.