GavelMoney.jpg

HOUSTON - The First Court of Appeals has reversed a judgment of more than $15 million against CenterPoint Energy, awarded after a jury found the company negligent for a worker’s injuries. 

The opinion stems from a lawsuit brought by Garett Wilder, who sued CenterPoint for negligence. Wilder was working for L.E. Myers at the time of the incident. 

Court records state that CenterPoint had instructed Wilder to ascend a 100-foot pole. About 40 feet up, one of the step bolts detached and fell to the ground. Upon impact, his heart stopped. A coworker performed CPR and revived him. Wilder was then taken to the hospital. 

Court records further show that there was testimony that L.E. Myers installed the incorrect step bolts into the concrete transmission pole from which Wilder fell.  

At trial, the jury found in favor of Wilder on his negligence claim, finding CenterPoint’s negligence proximately caused the occurrence and that the company was 51 percent responsible. 

The jury awarded Wilder $15,466,597 in damages on his negligence claim, and the trial court entered judgment based on their findings.  

On appeal, CenterPoint argued the trial court erred in rendering judgment in Wilder’s favor on his negligence claim because his claim was barred as a matter of law by Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, Chapter 95.

Chapter 95 limits a property owner’s liability when an independent contractor brings a claim arising over the condition of the improvement.

On Aug. 7, the First Court concluded that the public utility easement involved in this case constitutes “real property,” and CenterPoint, as the owner of that public utility easement, “owns real property” as required to meet the definition of “property owner” under Chapter 95.

Justices also concluded that Wilder did not conclusively establish at trial that CenterPoint had “actual knowledge of the danger or condition” that resulted in Wilder’s injury.

“We reverse the trial court’s judgment and render judgment that Wilder take nothing on his claim against CenterPoint,” the opinion states.

Case No. 01-22-00853-CV

More News