Former dean sues district, claims retaliation in termination

A former dean of instruction sued the school district where she had been employed, alleging that her termination was illegal retaliation. The school district requested that the lawsuit be dismissed because the district was immune from suit and because the dean's contract had expired and she was not entitled to continued employment. The court dismissed the lawsuit and the dean appealed to the court of appeals.

The dean was employed by a contract that was not governed by Chapter 21 of the Texas Education Code (the law that governs teacher contracts). The contract stated that it would expire at the end of the school year.

The dean declined to put the daughter of a school board member on the dean's list and in response, the board member threatened to fire her. Later that school year, the dean was informed that she would be recommended for nonrenewal and that her position would be restructured to that of an instructional coach. She was invited to apply for the instructional coach position. She interviewed but was not hired as an instructional coach. Her employment with the district ended when her contract expired at the end of the school year.

The dean alleged in her lawsuit that she had been wrongfully terminated. She also alleged that her contract had automatically renewed itself because she had not been nonrenewed.

The court of appeals noted that the dean needed to prove that she had a continuing entitlement under her contract in order to claim that the district wrongfully terminated or otherwise breached the contract. The law that the dean was relying on is from Chapter 21 of the Texas Education Code and it mandates that the school board is required to notify "each teacher whose contract is about to expire whether the board proposes to renew or not renew the contract," and if it does not do so within 10 days of "the last day of instruction in a school year," the teacher's contract is deemed automatically renewed. 

The dean claimed that because of this law, her contract had automatically renewed. But the court of appeals disagreed, noting that her contract was explicitly not governed by Chapter 21 of the Texas Education Code. Therefore, her contract did not automatically renew and expired at the end of its term.

Since the contract expired by its own terms, the district did not wrongfully terminate the dean and the court of appeals upheld the dismissal of the lawsuit.