Walker v. Harris
| Decision Date | 14 June 1996 |
| Docket Number | No. 95-1165,95-1165 |
| Citation | 924 S.W.2d 375 |
| Parties | 39 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 777 William WALKER and Deborah Walker, Individually and d/b/a Heritage Manor Apartments, Petitioners, v. Joyce HARRIS and Donald Harris, Respondents. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
Kenna M. Seiler, John M. Causey, Conroe, for Petitioners.
Lawrence Rothenberg, Houston, for Respondents.
This wrongful death action involves the duty of care a lessor owes to persons injured on the leased property by the criminal acts of third parties. The trial court granted summary judgment for the lessors, but the court of appeals reversed. 1995 WL 477560. We hold that the lessors, Deborah and William Walker, owed no legal duty to the decedent, Ronald Harris. We reverse the judgment of the court of appeals and render judgment that Harris's parents, Joyce and Donald Harris, take nothing.
The Walkers owned and operated two of ten separate fourplex apartment units in Brookshire, Texas. In 1990, Ronald Harris attended a party at one of the apartments and was stabbed to death by Andre Steffon Lasker somewhere near one of the Walkers' fourplexes. The parties dispute whether either Ronald Harris or Andre Lasker were invited guests at the party; neither Harris nor Lasker were the Walkers' tenants. The Harrises sued the Walkers for negligence, alleging that the Walkers knew or should have known that the area where the fourplex was located was known for criminal activity. They sought over $2,000,000 in actual damages based on the Walkers' alleged (1) negligent failure to warn the public, including Harris, of this condition, and (2) negligent failure to provide adequate security, including lighting, access control devices, or security guards. The Harrises also sought an unspecified amount of exemplary damages.
The Walkers sought summary judgment, arguing that a property owner generally has no duty to prevent the criminal acts of third parties. They asserted that although property owners may owe a duty to protect individuals from the criminal acts of third parties when the owners know or have reason to know that the third parties present an unreasonable risk of harm to those individuals they did not owe such a duty because Harris's stabbing was not foreseeable. The Walkers also argued that Lasker's intentional acts were a superseding and proximate cause of Harris's harm. Without stating its reasons, the trial court granted the Walkers' motion for summary judgment. The court of appeals reversed and remanded, holding that a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding the adequacy of the security provided by the Walkers. 1995 WL 477560 * 2.
To obtain a summary judgment, a defendant must either negate at least one element of the plaintiff's theory of recovery, "Moore" Burger, Inc. v. Phillips Petroleum Co., 492 S.W.2d 934, 936 (Tex.1972), or plead and conclusively prove each element of an affirmative defense. City of Houston v. Clear Creek Basin Auth., 589 S.W.2d 671, 678 (Tex.1979). After the defendant produces evidence entitling it to summary judgment, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to present evidence creating a fact issue. "Moore" Burger, 492 S.W.2d at 936-37. We take all evidence favorable to the nonmovant as true and indulge every reasonable inference in the nonmovant's favor. Nixon v. Mr. Property Management Co., 690 S.W.2d 546, 549 (Tex.1985).
The existence of a duty is a question of law for the court to decide from the facts surrounding the occurrence in question. Centeq Realty, Inc. v. Siegler, 899 S.W.2d 195, 197 (Tex.1995); Greater Houston Transp. Co. v. Phillips, 801 S.W.2d 523, 525 (Tex.1990). As a general rule, a person has no legal duty to protect another from the criminal acts of a third person or control the conduct of another. Centeq, 899 S.W.2d at 197; Phillips, 801 S.W.2d at 525; Otis Eng'g Corp. v. Clark, 668 S.W.2d 307, 309 (Tex.1983). Similarly, a landowner has no duty to prevent criminal acts of third parties who are not under the landowner's supervision or control. Exxon Corp. v. Tidwell, 867 S.W.2d 19, 21 (Tex.1993); El Chico Corp. v. Poole, 732 S.W.2d 306, 313 (Tex.1987). This general no-duty rule, however, is not absolute. See, e.g., Exxon, 867 S.W.2d at 21 (...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Doe v. Knights of Columbus
...statue of limitations for the reasons stated in text, and need not reach this particular issue. 29. See also Walker v. Harris, 924 S.W.2d 375, 377 (Tex. 1996) ("Foreseeability requires only that the general danger, not the exact sequence of events that produced the harm, be foreseeable.") (......
-
HNMC, Inc. v. Chan
...requires only that the general danger, not the exact sequence of events that produced the harm, be foreseeable. Walker v. Harris , 924 S.W.2d 375, 377 (Tex. 1996). Foreseeability alone, however, is not enough to create a duty. Kirwan , 298 S.W.3d at 624 ; Nabors Drilling , 288 S.W.3d at 441......
-
HNMC, Inc. v. Chan
...of similar occurrences, the documentation of the incidents, and the communications from Anderson. See McKenzie, 578 S.W.3d at 519; Walker, 924 S.W.2d at 377. Likelihood of Injury The likelihood of injury is also high because it is common for serious and life-threatening injuries to occur wh......
-
Orion Refining Corp. v. Uop, 01-05-00681-CV.
...can defeat that showing only by producing evidence that raises a genuine issue of material fact. TEX.R. CIV. P. 166a(c); Walker v. Harris, 924 S.W.2d 375, 377 (Tex.1996). In reviewing a summary judgment, we assume that all evidence that favors the nonmovant is true, and we indulge every rea......
-
Criminal responsibility - parties to crime
...to protect another from the criminal acts of a third person or to control the conduct of another. Id. At 207 (citing Walker v. Harris , 924 S.W.2d 375, 377 (Tex.1996)). In Guevara , the court held that “instructing the jury on the legal duty theory was error because Guevara did not have a l......
-
Organizing and Operating a Small Business
...existence of a duty is a question of law for the court to decide from the facts surrounding the occurrence” at issue. Walker v. Harris , 924 S.W.2d 375, 377 (Tex. 1996). Further, the duties owed by a landowner in a premises-liability case “depend upon the role of the person injured on his p......