Call Now
713-521-0059
It depends on who owns the park. A city, county or state park is owned by a governmental unit. Texas law makes a claim against the government for an assault in its park narrow and difficult. A private park, a trail run by a homeowners association, a festival ground, a paid campground or a commercial venue inside a park is a different case. The ordinary rules for property owners apply to it. Schiffer Law Firm in Houston looks at both, and we will tell you plainly which one you have.
The step that cannot wait is the record of what the operator knew. Park police reports, prior incident reports for the same park, lighting and patrol records, event permits and vendor contracts are the evidence. A public records request is often the first thing we file. Call 713-521-0059.
Two statutes. The Texas Tort Claims Act, Chapter 101 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, is the usual route to an injury claim against a city, county or state agency. It is narrow. Section 101.0215 lists “parks and zoos” among a municipality’s governmental functions. Section 101.021 waives immunity only for injury caused by an employee’s use of a motor-driven vehicle and for injury “caused by a condition or use of tangible personal or real property.” A claim that the city should have posted a patrol, a guard or a camera is a claim about a service it did not provide. It is not a claim about a condition of the property. That distinction has ended many cases.
Section 101.057(2) then provides that the Act does not apply to a claim “arising out of assault, battery, false imprisonment, or any other intentional tort.” The Texas Supreme Court read that exclusion in Delaney v. University of Houston, 835 S.W.2d 56 (Tex. 1992). A student was raped by an intruder who came through a dormitory door with a lock the university had failed to repair. The court held that the exclusion refers to intentional torts by government employees. Her negligence claim about the broken lock was not a claim “arising out of” the rape. A claim against a public park owner has to be built the way hers was: on a condition of the property the government controlled and failed to fix, not on the assault.
The second statute narrows it further. Chapter 75 is the recreational use statute. Section 75.002(f) provides that when you enter premises a governmental unit owns, operates or maintains and engage in recreation there, it does not owe you “a greater degree of care than is owed to a trespasser on the premises.” Recreation is defined broadly in Section 75.001. It includes hiking, picnicking, bicycling, walking dogs and “any other activity associated with enjoying nature or the outdoors.” Section 75.003(f) says the chapter does not waive sovereign immunity. Section 101.058 provides that where Chapter 75 limits a governmental unit’s liability, Chapter 75 controls. Section 75.002(d) preserves liability for gross negligence, malicious intent and bad faith, and Section 75.003(a) preserves it for deliberate, wilful or malicious injury. In practice that is the standard a claim against a public park owner has to meet.
Put together, a claim against a public park owner is possible, but it is narrow. It turns on a physical condition of the park, and on a duty well below the one a paying customer is owed. Section 101.101 also requires written notice of the claim to the governmental unit within six months of the incident, and a city charter can set a shorter period. Houston’s charter requires notice within 90 days. Whether your facts fit is a question for the first conversation, not an assumption either way.
More often than you might expect. Private parties operate in parks all the time. A festival promoter with a permit. A concert vendor. A security company hired for an event. A concession or rental business. A sports league that runs the fields. A campground operator. A trail or greenbelt owned by a homeowners association. A commercial venue inside the park. None of them is a governmental unit. The Tort Claims Act does not protect them. Chapter 75 protects a private owner only in the circumstances Section 75.003(c) describes, which turn on whether the owner charges for entry and on its insurance.
For those defendants the ordinary test applies. Texas starts from the rule that a person has no legal duty to protect another from the criminal acts of a third person. The exception turns on foreseeability. Timberwalk Apartments Partners, Inc. v. Cain, 972 S.W.2d 749 (Tex. 1998), lists the factors: prior crime on or near the property, how recent, how often, how similar, and how publicized. UDR Texas Properties, L.P. v. Petrie, 517 S.W.3d 98 (Tex. 2017), requires that the risk also be unreasonable, weighing the risk against the burden of preventing it. An event operator that knew of assaults at the same event the year before, and provided no lighting or security in the same area, is the case. Our page on negligent security claims explains the test in full.
Then the employer’s own conduct is your claim: who it hired, what it knew, and what it did when it heard a concern. Where the employer is a private league, camp or vendor, the claim proceeds like any negligent hiring or supervision case. Where the employer is the city, the Tort Claims Act analysis above applies. A league, camp or program that takes custody of children in a park also has to supervise them, and that includes protecting them from other children in the program. We look hard at whether a private organization ran the program under a permit or contract. Our page on sexual abuse at a youth center or youth group covers the youth program side.
Section 16.0045(b) of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code gives five years for the offenses it lists, which include sexual assault of an adult. Section 16.0045(a) gives thirty years for the child sexual abuse offenses it lists. Section 16.0045(d) tolls the period when a petition names an unknown assailant as John or Jane Doe, provided you proceed with diligence to identify him. A claim against a governmental unit requires written notice within six months under Section 101.101, and Houston’s charter requires it within 90 days. Our page on how long you have to sue goes through the periods.
Every statute and case linked above was read at its primary source. Texas statutes change every legislative session and case law is constantly changing.
This page is general information about Texas law. It is not legal advice about your situation, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship.
The answers decide whether your case is against a government, a private operator, or both. They come from records that a public records request and a preservation letter reach faster than anything else.
We start with ownership and control, because a park case against the wrong defendant goes nowhere. Then the first step is written notice to keep the records, along with the public records requests, and we obtain the incident history that shows what the operator knew.
Schiffer Law Firm is a Houston personal injury firm with 50 plus years of combined experience representing injured people and survivors across Texas.
If you are an advocate or a counselor asking on someone’s behalf, you are welcome to call with a general question. We will not ask you for their name.
There is no charge to talk, and no attorney’s fee unless there is a recovery.
Written by Jacob Schiffer, Attorney, Schiffer Law Firm. State Bar of Texas No. 24105175.
Call 713-521-0059.
Only on narrow grounds. The claim has to rest on a condition of the property the city controlled and failed to fix, as in Delaney v. University of Houston, not on the assault itself or on security the city did not provide. Section 75.002(f) limits the duty owed to recreational users to the duty owed a trespasser, so the claim has to show gross negligence, malicious intent or bad faith, and notice is due within six months, or 90 days in Houston. The facts decide whether a claim exists.
The private parties that ran it: the promoter, the security company, vendors and any private operator with a permit or lease. The Tort Claims Act does not protect them, and the foreseeability test from Timberwalk and UDR v. Petrie applies.
Only in the circumstances Section 75.003(c) describes, which turn on whether the owner charges for entry and on its insurance. Many private venues fall outside it.
The claim against the operator does not depend on identifying him. Section 16.0045(d) tolls the limitations period on the assault claim when a petition names the unknown assailant as John or Jane Doe, provided you proceed with diligence to identify him.
Five years for the offenses listed in Section 16.0045(b), which include sexual assault of an adult, and thirty years for the child offenses in Section 16.0045(a), measured from accrual. Any claim against a governmental unit requires written notice within six months under Section 101.101, and Houston's charter requires it within 90 days. Ask about your dates.