City of North Richland Hills, Texas v. Laura Friend

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that allegation of failure to use a particular device to revive woman did not fall within the waiver of immunity in section 101.021(2) of the Tort Claims Act
• explaining that plaintiffs may not use artful pleadings to enlarge the integral safety-component doctrine
• noting that “the doctrine of governmental immunity protects the public fisc by prohibiting suits against governmental units (or their employees acting within the scope of their employment) except in narrow circumstances prescribed by statute.”
• noting the “conscious indifference” or “reckless disregard for the safety of others” language in § 101.055(2) equates to the state of mind required for gross negligence
• rejecting plaintiffs’ attempt to artfully plead use of tangible personal property
• “It is well settled that mere nonuse of property does not suffice to invoke section 101.021(2)’s waiver.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).