Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:Antonio Gutierrez sued Laredo Independent School District for breach of contract. Gutierrez appeals the trial court’s order granting LISD’s motion for summary judgment. HOLDING:Affirmed. Generally, under Texas law, an aggrieved party, whose claim relates to the administration of school laws and involves disputed fact issues, must exhaust his administrative remedies with the Commission of Education before turning to the courts for relief. Jones v. Clarksville Indep. Sch. Dist., 46 S.W.3d 467 (Tex. App. � Texarkana 2001, no pet.). However, there are four exceptions to this general rule. First, exhaustion of administrative remedies is not required where the aggrieved party will suffer irreparable harm. Second, an exception to the requirement of pursuing administrative relief is found where the claims are for a violation of constitutional or federal statutory rights. Third, exhaustion of administrative remedies is not required where the cause of action involves pure questions of law and the facts are undisputed. Fourth, an aggrieved party is not required to exhaust administrative remedies where the Commissioner of Education lacks jurisdiction. Gutierrez contends that he was not required to exhaust his administrative remedies based on the first three exceptions. Gutierrez has offered no evidence to show that he could not be compensated by an award of damages. In fact, in his original and amended petitions, Gutierrez sought actual damages and damages for emotional distress and mental anguish. Furthermore, this court has held that a teacher’s claims of discrimination and breach of contract against a school district do not produce irreparable harm to allow the aggrieved party to bypass his administrative remedies. Harlandale Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Rodriguez, 121 S.W.3d 88 (Tex. App. � San Antonio 2003, no pet.). Therefore, the irreparable harm exception to the requirement of exhaustion of administrative remedies does not apply to Gutierrez. Gutierrez’s argument that the board exceeded its statutory authority does not excuse him from exhausting his administrative remedies. Because Gutierrez’s breach of contract claim involves disputed fact issues and not pure questions of law, Gutierrez was required to exhaust his administrative remedies before pursuing relief in the courts. OPINION:Lopez, C.J.; Lopez, C.J., Angelini and Marion, JJ.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.