Unreported / Non-Citable
Background
Houston Police Officer Keith Taylor was working a nighttime task force when he saw a disabled vehicle stopped in the middle lane of a five-lane freeway. Believing approaching motorists could strike the vehicle after cresting an overpass, Taylor activated his emergency lights and siren and moved his cruiser from the shoulder toward the disabled vehicle. Vonyae Q. Jordan’s vehicle collided with the cruiser during that maneuver.
Jordan sued the City of Houston for negligence, negligence per se, and negligent entrustment, alleging personal injuries. The City moved for no-evidence and traditional summary judgment based in part on governmental immunity and the Texas Tort Claims Act’s emergency exception. The trial court denied the motion, and the City brought an interlocutory appeal.
The Court’s Holding
The First Court of Appeals held that Jordan failed to produce more than a scintilla of evidence negating the emergency exception. A vehicle stopped in the middle of a highway was an unforeseen circumstance requiring immediate action, regardless of Jordan’s assertion that the vehicle was visible and avoidable. The court emphasized the speed of highway traffic and rejected the argument that clear weather, lighting, and light traffic eliminated the emergency.
The court also held that Jordan presented no evidence that Taylor acted with conscious indifference or reckless disregard for others’ safety. Taylor’s body-camera statements showed that he entered Jordan’s lane while trying to position his cruiser behind the disabled vehicle, but neither those statements nor the collision itself supported a finding of willful or wanton disregard. Because the emergency exception preserved the City’s immunity, the court reversed the trial court and rendered judgment dismissing the suit for want of jurisdiction.
Key Takeaways
- A vehicle stopped in a highway travel lane can constitute an emergency situation under the Texas Tort Claims Act even when motorists can see and avoid it.
- A collision and an officer’s acknowledgment that he entered another driver’s lane do not, without more, establish conscious indifference or reckless disregard.
- Because Jordan did not raise a material fact issue negating the emergency exception, the City retained governmental immunity and was entitled to dismissal.
Why It Matters
The decision applies the TTCA’s emergency exception broadly to an officer’s immediate response to a roadway obstruction. Plaintiffs seeking to overcome governmental immunity in similar vehicle-collision cases must produce evidence not merely of negligence or a judgment error, but of conduct reflecting subjective awareness of an extreme risk or willful and wanton disregard for safety.