City of San Antonio and San Antonio River Authority v. Osvaldo Peralta, 04-15-00254-CV

Peralta sued the City of San Antonio and the San Antonio River Authority for injuries from a bicycle-path incident along the San Antonio River on Oct 10, 2011.
The path is part of the Mission Trail bike and hike route, allegedly controlled by the City or SARA.
The City and SARA asserted governmental immunity and filed Pleas to the Jurisdiction.
Peralta amended his petition to assert willful/wanton conduct and gross negligence under the Texas Recreational Use Statute (RUS).
The trial court denied the City’s Plea to the Jurisdiction, and the City appeals to challenge sovereign immunity and RUS application.
The appellate court ultimately treats the RUS as the controlling limitation on immunity and grants dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court properly denied the Plea to the Jurisdiction.	Peralta argues RUS does not bar immunity and seeks jurisdiction.	The City argues RUS imposes willful/wanton or gross negligence standard, waiving immunity.	Plea to jurisdiction should be sustained; RUS controls immunity.
Whether Peralta pleaded facts showing willful/wanton conduct or gross negligence under the RUS.	Peralta alleged negligent conditions and post-incident assurances.	No facts show extreme risk or conscious indifference; insufficient evidence.	Peralta failed to plead or prove required RUS standards; immunity preserved.

City of Vasquez v. City of San Antonio, 340 S.W.3d 844 (Tex. App. – San Antonio, 2011) (designated bike path covered by Recreational Use Statute)
City of Fort Worth v. Crockett, 142 S.W.3d 550 (Tex. App. – Fort Worth, 2004) (immunity and RUS interaction under Tort Claims Act)
City of Plano v. Homoky, 294 S.W.3d 809 (Tex. App. – Dallas, 2009) (Recreational Use Statute limitations on waiver of immunity)
City of Waco v. Kirwan, 298 S.W.3d 618 (Tex. 2009) (RUS standard is a specialized care standard; gross negligence requires extreme risk and conscious indifference)
Texas Dept. of Parks & Wildlife v. Miranda, 133 S.W.3d 217 (Tex. 2004) (sovereign immunity; proper vehicle to challenge immunity is plea to jurisdiction)
Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Garrison Contractors, Inc., 966 S.W.2d 482 (Tex. 1998) (statutory waivers and duty definitions under Tort Claims Act)
National Liability & Fire Ins. Co. v. Allen, 15 S.W.3d 525 (Tex. 2000) (statutory interpretation guide for waivers of immunity)
Perkins v. State, 367 S.W.2d 140 (Tex. 1963) (statutory construction principles for interpreting waivers and limitations)