Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code § 101.022 – Government Duty on Public Premises
Table of Contents
Statutory Text:
§ 101.022(a): For premises liability claims under the Texas Tort Claims Act, a governmental unit owes the same duty to a licensee that a private landowner would owe.
§ 101.022(b): The duty to a licensee includes:
Not injuring them willfully or wantonly
Warning of hidden dangers actually known to the government
§ 101.022(c): Applies to premises liability claims only—not motor vehicle or general negligence claims.
§ 101.022(d): In recreational use cases under § 75.002, the government’s duty is even lower—similar to the duty owed to a trespasser.
) – A cause of action for wrongful death exists when an individual’s death is caused by the wrongful act, neglect, carelessness, unskillfulness, or default of another.
§ 71.002(b) – The right to bring the action exists even if the event could have resulted in a personal injury claim had the person lived.
What Is § 101.022?
This statute defines the limited duty of care that Texas government entities owe to people who are injured on public land or facilities. It applies only to premises liability claims under the Texas Tort Claims Act.
Key Points of Government Premises Liability
The government owes a licensee-level duty, not the higher “invitee” duty.
No duty to inspect or make the property safe for others.
A duty exists only to avoid willful/wanton harm or to warn of hidden dangers the government actually knows about.
Recreational users are treated almost like trespassers (very limited protection).
Government’s Duty to Invitees vs. Licensees
| Duty Type | Private Landowner | Government under § 101.022 |
|---|---|---|
| Invitee | Warn + inspect + make safe | ❌ Not owed |
| Licensee | Warn of known dangers | ✅ Owed |
| Trespasser | Avoid willful harm only | ✅ (if recreation use) |
Example Scenario
A person trips on uneven pavement at a city park. Unless the city knew of the hazard, there may be no liability.
Someone slips inside a courthouse restroom. The government is only liable if it knew of the danger and failed to warn.
A jogger falls in a government-owned greenbelt area. If the land is used for recreation, the city may owe no duty at all (per § 75.002 and § 101.022(d)).
How § 101.022 Impacts Texas Tort Claims
Tightens liability for premises defects on public property
Often used to dismiss lawsuits when plaintiffs cannot prove:
The government knew about the hazard
The plaintiff had legal status beyond trespasser
Applies only to premises defect cases, not general negligence or vehicle use
Related Statutes
§ 101.021 – Government Liability for Vehicle Use
§ 101.023 – Damage Caps
§ 75.002 – Recreational Use Statute
Texas Case Law Interpreting § 101.022
Clarified the distinction between special defect (higher duty) and general premises defect under § 101.022.
Reinforced that governments are not liable unless they knew of the condition and failed to warn.
Frequently Asked Questions About § 101.022
Houston Personal Injury Lawyer - Joel A. Gordon
Only the duty owed to a licensee, which is to avoid willful harm and warn of known dangers. No duty to inspect or make safe.
If the property is used for recreational purposes, the government owes almost no duty of care, similar to what’s owed to a trespasser.
Only if you can prove the government knew about the danger and failed to warn or fix it. Otherwise, sovereign immunity may apply.
No. Vehicle accidents fall under § 101.021, not § 101.022.