Dallas Metrocare Services v. Juarez, 420 S.W.3d 78

Juarez, a patient receiving outpatient mental-health treatment at Metrocare, was injured when a large whiteboard placed on a nearby table fell on him.
Juarez alleged Metrocare negligently failed to secure the whiteboard and created an unreasonably unsafe condition.
Metrocare filed a plea to the jurisdiction arguing immunity and that Juarez did not plead a waiver under the Texas Tort Claims Act.
Metrocare claimed Juarez’s claim did not involve the use of tangible personal property and failed premises-defect knowledge requirements.
Juarez responded that he pleaded a general negligence claim based on the condition or use of tangible personal property—the unsecured whiteboard—and the trial court denied the plea.
On appeal, the court reviews de novo whether the pleaded facts establish jurisdiction and waivers under the Tort Claims Act.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Juarez pleaded a TP property claim under the Act	Juarez alleged negligence involving tangible personal property (the whiteboard).	Juarez’s claim involves real property or lacks actual knowledge of a dangerous condition.	Yes; Juarez pleaded a tangible personal-property claim and immunity was properly waived.

In re Miranda, 133 S.W.3d 217 (Tex. 2004) (standard for jurisdictional challenges and liberal pleading inferences)
County of Cameron v. Brown, 80 S.W.3d 549 (Tex. 2002) (waiver of immunity requires pleaded facts showing statutory grounds)
City of Celina v. Blair, 171 S.W.3d 608 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2005) (tangible personal-property injury claims can support immunity waiver)
City of Dallas v. Heard, 252 S.W.3d 98 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2008) (premises defects require actual knowledge under waiver framework)
City of Wylie v. Taylor, 362 S.W.3d 855 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2012) (premises-defect waiver analysis and knowledge prerequisite)
Turley v. City of Dallas, 316 S.W.3d 762 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2010) (plea-to-the-jurisdiction standards and jurisdictional review)