HOUSTON – Today, the 14th Court of Appeals dismissed a lawsuit against the city of Houston – litigation brought by a man claiming a crane operator swung a crane arm “dangerously close” to him.
Back in 2019, Eric Gonzales, a former U.S. Marine, filed suit against the city of Houston, seeking damages for his mental anguish.
According to his lawsuit, on July 27, 2017, Gonzales was at his Houston home gathering tree branches in his yard for the heavy waste pickup scheduled that day. He asked a city crane operator tasked with picking up the waste to wait while he finished gathering the rest of the branches in his yard.
“The impatient operator rudely bellowed to Gonzales, leading to an escalation of harsh words between them,” the suit states. “The crane operator, who was still in the cab, swung the carne arm at Gonzales in an effort to strike him or scare him away.”
In his suit, Gonzales says he ran inside and called the police following the incident. When he went back outside, the crane operator had fled. Supervisors for Solid Waste Management concluded the operator should have never swung a crane arm towards him, the suit states.
Gonzales accused the city of negligence, alleging the operator “swung the crane arm dangerously close” to him and that he would have been struck had he not jumped out the way.
Gonzales claims he was suffering from PTSD from his two tours of duty and that the danger of the swinging crane arm agitated his mental state, causing him to suffer anxiety attacks, profuse sweating and an inability to sleep.
The city responded to the suit with a Rule 91a motion to dismiss, arguing that it had governmental immunity, court records show.
The trial court denied the motion, prompting the city to appeal.
The 14th Court of Appeals concluded that there is no general duty in Texas not to negligently inflict emotional distress, with the only exception being for bystanders who witness a close family member’s death or serious injury.
“Here, Gonzales admits he was not physically injured, and he does not assert a bystander claim,” the 14th Court’s opinion states. “Thus, he has not alleged a personal injury caused by the crane operator’s negligence that would waive the City’s immunity from liability and suit.
“Accordingly, the trial court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over Gonzales’s negligence claim.”
Justices reversed the trial court’s ruling denying the city’s motion to dismiss and rendered judgment dismissing Gonzales’ claims against the city.
Houston attorney Henry Drewinko represents Gonzales.
The city is represented by City Attorney Ronald Lewis.
Appeals case No. 14-19-00768-CV