The Texas Military Department (TMD) has successfully appealed a trial court's ruling regarding sovereign immunity in a case involving a motor vehicle accident. The court ruled that TMD is protected from lawsuits under the Texas Tort Claims Act because the employee involved was acting within the scope of military duties at the time of the incident. This decision affects both the TMD and individuals seeking to file claims against state military forces.
The case, Texas Military Department v. Norma Uresti-Marin, Individually and A/N/F A.S., a Minor, was filed in the Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District, under docket number 13-25-00476-CV. The court's ruling, delivered on June 11, 2026, clarifies the application of sovereign immunity in cases involving state military personnel.
Background
Norma Uresti-Marin, the appellee, was involved in a motor vehicle accident on May 1, 2023, when she was stopped behind another vehicle at a stop sign. The other driver, Mario Castillo, was operating a rental car that the Texas Army National Guard had rented. Castillo, who was on active duty supporting the Joint Task Force – Operation Lone Star, reversed into Uresti-Marin's vehicle, leading to the collision.
Following the accident, Uresti-Marin filed a lawsuit on October 1, 2024, initially targeting only Castillo and the rental car company. After Castillo filed a motion to dismiss, stating the suit should be against TMD, Uresti-Marin amended her petition to include TMD as a defendant. The key issue in the case was whether TMD could claim sovereign immunity due to Castillo's status as a military employee at the time of the accident.
The Ruling
The Texas Court of Appeals ruled in favor of TMD, reversing the trial court's denial of its plea to the jurisdiction. The court found that Castillo was engaged in an activity of the state military forces when the accident occurred, which falls under the exception to the Texas Tort Claims Act's waiver of immunity.
The court stated, "We conclude... that TMD’s employee was engaged in an activity of the state military forces when the underlying accident happened."
The ruling emphasized that Uresti-Marin needed to demonstrate that the statutory waiver of immunity did not apply, which she failed to do. The court noted that Castillo's actions, including stopping for food while on duty, were part of his military activities.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for future cases involving claims against state military personnel. It reinforces the principle that military employees on active duty may be shielded from lawsuits if their actions are deemed to be within the scope of their military duties. The court's decision aligns with previous rulings, particularly a similar case known as Texas Military Department v. Lopez, which established a precedent regarding the interpretation of the Texas Tort Claims Act.
As a result, individuals considering legal action against military personnel must now carefully evaluate whether the actions in question occurred while the individual was performing military duties. This ruling may limit the ability of plaintiffs to successfully claim damages in similar situations, as the court has set a precedent that broadens the interpretation of what constitutes an activity of the state military forces.
What's Next
Uresti-Marin may have the option to appeal the ruling to a higher court, but details regarding any potential appeal were not available in the court filing. As of now, there are no related cases pending that could influence this decision.