HOUSTON - Back in March, the Fourteenth Court of Appeals affirmed a ruling denying the city of Houston governmental immunity in a lawsuit brought over a police officer’s automobile collision.
On Friday, the Texas Supreme court denied Houston’s petition for review, which argued that the city retains its immunity because the officer was not acting within the scope of his employment at the time of the accident.
Court records show Kevin Fisher sued the city in 2020 alleging negligence.
According to the 14th Court’s March 2 opinion, the collision occurred on June 27, 2019. The officer had just finished eating lunch and was attempting to fasten his seatbelt when he rear-ended Fisher. The officer agreed that the collision was his fault because he took his “eyes off the road” and “looked down” to untangle his seat belt, which got caught around his radio antenna.
Court records show the city filed a plea to the jurisdiction, asserting that Fisher’s claims fall outside the Texas Tort Claims Act’s limited waiver of immunity because at the time of the accident the officer was not acting within his scope of employment.
The trial court denied the appeal and the city appealed.
On appeal, the city argued that it is protected by governmental immunity because the officer was not acting in the course and scope of his employment at the time of the collision.
The 14th Court affirmed the trial court’s ruling, finding that the city did not provide evidence that the officer was still on his lunch break or that he had not yet returned to work.
“As a patrol officer and in the absence of evidence that he was still on his lunch break or doing a personal errand unrelated to his employment, (the officer) had already returned to his ‘place of work’ when he got back to his patrol car, resuming his responsibilities as a patrol officer by driving his car,” the opinion states. “Accordingly, we reject the City’s contention that the evidence conclusively establishes that (the officer) was not acting within the scope of his employment at the time of the collision.
“We affirm the trial court’s order denying the City’s plea to the jurisdiction.”
Appeals case No. 14-21-00573-CV