Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC v. Maricela Ramirez and Herman Rendon, as Next Friend of W.R., a Minor

Summary

The First District Court of Appeals of Texas affirmed the denial of Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC’s traditional summary-judgment motion in a wrongful-death action arising from an employee’s electrocution by a sagging high-voltage power line. The court held that Oncor did not conclusively establish that the deceased employee was a “person responsible” for temporary work or activity under Chapter 752 of the Texas Health and Safety Code or that the statutory affirmative defense applied. At minimum, fact questions existed regarding the employee’s employment scope, authority, knowledge, and responsibility under the statute.

Holdings

1. Oncor did not conclusively establish that Ramirez was a person responsible for temporary work, activity, or function within six feet of a high-voltage overhead line. The statutory term responsible, read according to its plain meaning and in context, contemplates a person or entity answerable for the activity and theoretically able to provide notice, negotiate a safety arrangement, and pay the associated costs.
2. Oncor was not entitled to summary judgment because it failed to conclusively establish every element of its Chapter 752 affirmative defense, including that Ramirez was a person responsible under the statute and violated its requirements.
3. Scope of employment was relevant to whether Ramirez was responsible under Chapter 752, and the evidence did not conclusively establish that he acted outside the scope of his employment when he investigated the fire.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an employee who investigated a brushfire during work and was electrocuted near a high-voltage overhead line was conclusively shown to be a person responsible for temporary work, activity, or function under Texas Health and Safety Code Chapter 752.
2. Whether Oncor conclusively established its Chapter 752 affirmative defense so as to obtain summary judgment.
3. Whether the summary-judgment evidence conclusively established that Ramirez was acting outside the scope of his employment when he investigated the brushfire.

Disposition

affirmed