Michael Henderson v. CC-Parque View, LLC D/B/A Parque View Apartments, Asset Plus Corporation, Asset Plus Companies, LP, Asset Plus Realty Corporation, and Asset Plus USA, LLC
01-16-00949-CV
| Tex. App. | May 18, 2017Background
- Michael Henderson, a tenant at Parque View Apartments, was shot in the abdomen by a Ranger Guard security officer (Dameon Roberson) with a rubber bullet during an early-morning parking-lot encounter and was injured.
- Parque View contracted Ranger Guard to provide security; the written contract expressly labeled Ranger Guard an independent contractor and warranted that its personnel would be licensed and screened.
- Ranger Guard supervised Roberson; Roberson submitted daily shift and incident reports to Ranger Guard and copies to Parque View. Prior reports included confrontations and resident complaints about coarse language; none showed prior violence or criminal conduct by Roberson.
- Parque View had posted or attempted to post notices to residents that security was patrolling after some residents called police believing officers were impersonated.
- Henderson sued Parque View for (1) negligent hiring/retention of Ranger Guard (direct liability) and (2) negligent failure to warn tenants of armed security; Parque View moved for traditional summary judgment asserting Ranger Guard was an independent contractor and Parque View had no duty to warn.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for Parque View; the court of appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Parque View may be held liable for negligent hiring/retention of an independent-contractor security guard | Henderson: Parque View is directly liable for negligently retaining Ranger Guard/Roberson despite independent-contractor label | Parque View: Ranger Guard was an independent contractor; Parque View had no control over method/details; Ranger Guard warranted and supervised personnel | Held: Summary judgment for Parque View. No evidence Parque View knew Roberson posed unreasonable risk; independent-contractor rule and warranty/supervision by Ranger Guard preclude direct liability |
| Whether Parque View had a duty to warn tenants that armed security patrolled the premises | Henderson: Apartment owner should have warned tenants of armed security presence | Parque View: No duty to notify; contracting for security is a reasonable safety measure and not a hidden danger; no notice Parque View knew security was inherently dangerous | Held: Summary judgment for Parque View. No recognized duty to notify; no evidence security possession or use was unlawful or that Parque View knew of an unreasonable risk |
Key Cases Cited
- Fifth Club, Inc. v. Ramirez, 196 S.W.3d 788 (Tex. 2006) (declines personal-character exception for independent-contractor security; discusses negligent hiring/retention burdens)
- Ross v. Texas One Partnership, 796 S.W.2d 206 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1990, writ denied) (refuses duty to warn tenants of armed security; security work not inherently dangerous)
- Timberwalk Apts., Partners, Inc. v. Cain, 972 S.W.2d 749 (Tex. 1998) (landowners owe duty when they know or should know of unreasonable, foreseeable risk from third parties)
- Redinger v. Living, Inc., 689 S.W.2d 415 (Tex. 1985) (duty to ensure work is performed safely belongs to independent contractor, not hiring party)
- Lefmark Mgmt. Co. v. Old, 946 S.W.2d 52 (Tex. 1997) (premises controllers must use reasonable care to make premises safe and warn of hidden dangers)