Esther Bird and Kenneth Wetcher, M.d., P.a., and Associates, Petitioners v. W.c.w., Respondent

Summary

The Texas Supreme Court held that a mental health professional does not owe a professional duty of care to a third party to avoid negligent misdiagnosis of a child, and that a psychologist's affidavit identifying a parent as an alleged abuser is privileged as a communication made in judicial proceedings. Accordingly, the Court reversed the Court of Appeals and entered judgment for the petitioners. Justice Gammage, in a concurring opinion, warned that the ruling should not be read as granting absolute immunity, while Justice Cornyn concurred that the affidavit was privileged.