Date: 07-03-2025

Case Style:

Guadalupe Frias and Shannon McKinnon v. Genaro Hernandez

Case Number: 23-CV-550

Judge: Sidney A. Fitzwater

Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Dallas County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: Geoff Henley

Defendant's Attorney: Dallas City Attorney's Office

Description: Dallas, Texas personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiffs who sued on a civil rights violation under 42 U.S.C. 1983.

Genaro Hernandez is a Dallas Police Department (“DPD”) detective by day and private employee of the Stainback Organization by night. In August 2019, a shooting occurred outside the Stainback Organization’s neighbor, a Dallas bar called The Green Elephant. Detective Hernandez allegedly inserted himself into the subsequent criminal investigation at the behest of his private employer to pursue a slew of bogus charges against plaintiff-appellees, the owner of and a hired security guard for The Green Elephant, neither of whom had anything to do with the shooting. Even if his questionable conduct stemmed from an ulterior motive to benefit the Stainback Organization, Hernandez’s acts fell within the heartland of his role as a detective.

* * *

Plaintiffs sued Hernandez. Their complaint alleged federal claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for false arrest and malicious prosecution and state-law claims for malicious prosecution, false imprisonment, and civil conspiracy. Hernandez moved to dismiss all the claims against him. The district court granted Hernandez’s motion to dismiss the federal malicious-prosecution claim based on qualified immunity. But the court denied his motion to dismiss the federal false-arrest claim, which remains pending. The court denied his motion to dismiss the three state-law claims. Hernandez now appeals, arguing only that the district court erred in failing to dismiss the plaintiffs’ state-law claims because he is entitled to governmental immunity under the Texas Tort Claims Act.

Outcome: Motion to dismiss denied.

Because Texas law affords state actors broad immunity for acts objectively within the scope of their employment, regardless of their subjective intent, Hernandez is immune from suit. The district court’s judgment denying dismissal of the plaintiffs’ state-law claims must be REVERSED with instructions to Dismiss, and the case is REMANDED for further proceedings as to the plaintiffs’ remaining federal claim.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: