City of Houston v. Esparza

After a car wreck, Gloria Esparza sued the city of Houston, alleging that its employee's negligence was the cause. She sued the employee, too, but the employee was dismissed from the suit under the Texas Tort Claims Act's election-of-remedies provision. The trial court denied the city's plea to the jurisdiction under the same provision, from which the city appeals. Once a claimant elects to sue a governmental unit instead of its employee, Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code §101.106(a) immediately and forever bars the claimant from bringing common law tort claims regarding that subject matter against its employees. Under subsection (b), once a claimant elects to sue a government employee instead of its governmental employer, subsection (b) immediately and forever bars the claimant from bringing common law tort claims regarding that subject matter against the employer. The trial court therefore properly dismissed her claims against the employee, and she is forever barred from bringing common law tort claims against him arising out the accident at issue here. But, as long as she has otherwise complied with the jurisdictional requisites of the Tort Claims Act, subsection (b) does not bar Esparza from pursuing her claims against the city, her elected defendant. The trial court's order is affirmed. Houston's 1st Court of Appeals, No. 01-11-00046-CV, 10-07-2011.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

OPINION ON REHEARING

After a car wreck, Gloria Esparza sued the City of Houston, alleging that its employee’s negligence was the cause. She sued the employee, too, but the employee was dismissed from the suit under the Texas Tort Claims Act’s election-of-remedies provision. The trial court denied the City’s plea to the jurisdiction under the same provision, from which the City appeals.*fn1 We issued an opinion on June 9, 2011 in favor of the City. Esparza has moved for rehearing, raising new jurisdictional arguments. We grant rehearing and withdraw our previous opinion. We conclude that the trial court properly denied the City’s plea to the jurisdiction. We therefore affirm the trial court’s order.

Background

Esparza sued the City and its employee, Manuel Espinoza, alleging that Espinoza negligently caused a car accident involving Esparza.*fn2 The City moved to dismiss Esparza’s claims against Espinoza individually, pursuant to section 101.106(e) of the Tort Claims Act.*fn3 It also filed a plea to the jurisdiction, asserting that Esparza’s claims against the City are barred by section 101.106(b) of the Act.*fn4

City of Houston v. Esparza

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal