Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:Grace Estrada was invited to visit San Antonio Fire Station No. 10 by an off-duty San Antonio firefighter in the early morning hours of Oct. 29, 2004. Estrada, along with several other women, allegedly consumed alcohol and socialized with both on-duty and off-duty firefighters at the fire station. The firefighters allowed Estrada to try on their firefighting gear, sit on the fire truck and slide down the station’s fire pole, which allowed Estrada to go from the station’s second floor to its first floor. After Estrada had successfully descended the fire pole several times, she attempted to descend the fire pole one last time. On this descent, unlike her previous ones, Estrada attempted to descend the fire pole in tandem with one of the on-duty firefighters from Fire Station No. 10, Miguel De Los Santos. Estrada alleges De Los Santos allowed her to climb onto his back and shoulders after he had positioned himself on the fire pole. Once Estrada did, however, De Los Santos immediately began to slide down the fire pole, causing Estrada to lose her grip on De Los Santos and the pole. Estrada fell approximately 10 to 12 feet to the ground below. Estrada subsequently filed suit against the city under the Texas Tort Claims Act (TTCA), Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code �101.021(2), seeking damages for her injuries. Specifically, Estrada raised a “negligent activity” claim, alleging her injuries derive from an ongoing activity at the fire station: De Los Santos’ descent down the fire pole with Estrada on his back and shoulders. The city responded by filing a plea to the jurisdiction, arguing that it was immune from suit because Estrada’s petition failed to state a claim within the limited waiver of the TTCA. The city argued that Estrada is limited to raising a premises defect claim; thus, it asserted that Estrada had not alleged a valid waiver of immunity, because her petition does include any allegations or facts indicating that either the fire pole or the station was defective as required to maintain such cause of action. The trial court denied the city’s plea. The city appealed. HOLDING:Affirmed. Estrada’s petition, the court stated, essentially alleged her injuries derived from an ongoing activity at the fire station: De Los Santos’ descent down the fire pole with Estrada on his back and shoulders. Nothing in Estrada’s petition, the court stated, suggests she was injured by a condition of the premises or by some activity that occurred on the premises earlier and was not ongoing at the time of her injury. When the plaintiff alleges her injuries were caused by an ongoing activity of the defendant, rather than by a condition of the premises, the plaintiff has properly alleged a negligent activity claim, the court stated. Because Estrada has properly alleged a negligent activity claim against the city, the court held that Estrada pleaded sufficient facts to establish a waiver of the city’s immunity under the TTCA. OPINION:Stone, J.; Stone, Speedlin and Simmons, J.J.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.