Texas Case Summaries
Federal Enforcement »

City of Palmview v. Segovia — Court dismisses city manager’s contract claim on governmental-immunity grounds

Unreported / Non-Citable

Case
City of Palmview v. Ramon Segovia
Court
Texas Thirteenth Court of Appeals
Judge
Justice Peña; Justice West; Justice Fonseca
Date Decided
September 17, 2026
Docket No.
13-24-00461-CV
Topics
Governmental Immunity; Municipal Contracts; Employment Law; Pleas to the Jurisdiction
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Ramon Segovia was appointed interim city manager of Palmview in October 2013. At a special meeting, the city council’s agenda listed discussion and possible action concerning the appointment or contract of a city manager. After an executive session, the council voted in open session to appoint Segovia as city manager.

After the meeting, the city attorney presented Segovia with a written employment agreement addressing salary, benefits, renewal, evaluations, and severance. Segovia and City Commissioner Perez signed the agreement, which Segovia placed in his personnel file. The City terminated Segovia in 2017, and he sued for breach of contract after it declined to pay severance. The trial court denied the City’s plea to the jurisdiction, and the City brought an interlocutory appeal.

The Court’s Holding

The Thirteenth Court of Appeals held that the City retained governmental immunity because Segovia did not establish that the employment agreement was “properly executed” on the City’s behalf as required for the statutory waiver of immunity under Texas Local Government Code Chapter 271.

The council minutes reflected a vote to appoint Segovia, not a vote approving his employment contract. No evidence showed that the proposed agreement was presented to or approved by the council, or that Commissioner Perez had authority to bind the City by signing it. Segovia’s conclusory affidavit stating that the commissioners had voted to contract with him did not create a genuine fact issue. The court reversed the trial court, rendered judgment granting the City’s plea to the jurisdiction, and dismissed Segovia’s claims with prejudice.

Key Takeaways

  • Chapter 271 waives a local governmental entity’s immunity from qualifying contract claims only when the written contract was properly executed on the entity’s behalf.
  • A municipal vote appointing an employee does not, without additional evidence, establish council approval of a separate written employment agreement.
  • A council member’s signature and a plaintiff’s conclusory affidavit do not create a fact issue absent evidence that the council approved the contract or authorized the signer to bind the municipality.

Why It Matters

The decision underscores that parties contracting with Texas municipalities must confirm that the governing body formally approved the agreement and that the person signing for the municipality possessed authority to do so. Possession of a signed agreement and performance under it may not be enough to invoke Chapter 271’s immunity waiver.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top