Foster v. Estrada

In Foster v. Estrada, 974 S.W.2d 751, 754 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1998, pet. denied), the Court determined that a school principal's and coach's summary judgment proof did not prove the discretionary element because their affidavits were merely conclusory, self-serving statements. The Fosters argued that these affidavits did not prove that the school principal's and coach's omissions-not preventing their son from entering the gymnasium-involved the exercise of judgment and discretion. In the affidavits, the principal and coach each stated, "my actions involved the exercise of judgment and discretion on my part." The Court held that by making this statement, the affiants merely asserted a legal conclusion. Id. at 753. The affidavits did not demonstrate how or why the disputed omission was legally characterized as involving the exercise of judgment or discretion. Instead, the statements were merely self-serving assertions. Id. Because each statement merely stated a legal conclusion, the affidavits were not sufficient to support summary judgment as a matter of law. Consequently, the Court determined that the principal and coach did not meet their burden in establishing a defense under Section 22.051. Foster, 974 S.W.2d at 753-54.