Are Texas landowners liable for police actions on their land or for livestock that escape due to outside interference?

Plain-English summary

Representative Ryan Guillen, chair of the House Committee on Culture, Recreation & Tourism, asked the Attorney General whether existing law protects landowners, lessees, and occupants of agricultural land from liability in two settings. The first was liability connected to human smuggling and the law enforcement actions that surround it when those activities occur on a person's land. The second was liability for livestock that escape because of outside acts the owner cannot control, such as trespassing, firefighting activities, game warden activities, poaching, and vandalism.

The Attorney General did not answer either question. Whether liability attaches in a particular set of circumstances depends on the specific facts and is for a court to decide, not the opinion process, which does not resolve fact questions. The AG offered one general observation: under a set of facts in which there is no fault attributable to an owner, lessee, or occupant of land, a court is unlikely to impose liability on that person, noting that liability under the stock laws has always required more than the mere presence of the defendant's animals in a forbidden place. Beyond that general point, the AG concluded it was unable to answer the questions as a matter of law.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2013. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later Attorney General opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

What the opinion meant for those who asked

The House Committee on Culture, Recreation & Tourism (as the opinion described it): The opinion declined to decide whether landowners, lessees, or occupants are liable in the situations described, explaining that liability turns on the specific facts and is a question for a court, outside the purview of an attorney general opinion. It added only the general observation that, absent fault attributable to the owner, lessee, or occupant, a court is unlikely to impose liability.

Common questions

Did the AG decide whether landowners are liable for these situations?
No. The AG declined, explaining that whether liability results in any particular set of circumstances is a fact question for a court, beyond the purview of an attorney general opinion.

Did the opinion say anything useful about liability?
Only generally. The AG observed that where there is no fault attributable to the owner, lessee, or occupant of the land, a court is unlikely to impose liability, citing that stock-law liability has always required more than the mere presence of the defendant's animals in a forbidden place.

Background and statutory framework

The Attorney General relied on the established limit that the opinion process does not resolve fact questions or assess the merits of potential lawsuits, which turn on the specific facts involved (Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-0430 (2006) at 4). For its one general observation about fault, the AG cited a court of appeals decision on stock-law liability (Goode v. Bauer, 109 S.W.3d 788, 792 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 2003, pet. denied)).

Citations

Cases:

• Goode v. Bauer, 109 S.W.3d 788, 792 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 2003, pet. denied)

Other authority:

• Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-0430 (2006) at 4 (declining to opine on potential liability because it turns on specific facts)

Source

• Landing page: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/greg-abbott/ga-1027
• Original PDF: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/2013/ga1027.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from the official PDF. Minor extraction artifacts were corrected; the linked PDF is authoritative.

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
GREG ABBOTT

November 25, 2013

The Honorable Ryan Guillen Opinion No. GA-1027
Chair, Committee on Culture,
Recreation & Tourism Re: Whether landowners may be liable for
Texas House of Representatives the actions of law enforcement officers that
Post Office Box 2910 occur on the landowners' property or for
Austin, Texas 78768-2910 livestock that escape due to actions over
which the landowners have no control
(RQ-1127-GA)

Dear Representative Guillen:

You ask whether existing law protects landowners, lessees and occupants of agricultural land from liability in different circumstances.[1] Specifically, you ask about liability in the context of human smuggling and law enforcement actions surrounding those activities. Request Letter at 1. You also ask about liability for the escape of livestock due to "external actions over which the [landowners, lessees, and occupants] have no control, such as trespassing, firefighting activities, game warden activities, poaching and vandalism." Id. at 1. The question of liability in particular circumstances involves issues for a court to determine and is thus outside the purview of an attorney general opinion. See Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-0430 (2006) at 4 (declining to opine about potential liability "[b]ecause the merits of any particular lawsuit would be determined by the specific facts involved and because this office does not resolve fact questions"). We can generally advise you that under a set of facts in which there is no fault attributable to an owner, lessee, or occupant of land, a court is unlikely to impose liability on the owner, lessee, or occupant. Cf. Goode v. Bauer, 109 S.W.3d 788, 792 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 2003, pet. denied) ("liability for a violation of the stock laws has always required more than the presence of the defendant's animals in a forbidden place"). As a result, we are unable to answer your questions as a matter of law.

SUMMARY

Whether any particular set of circumstances will result in liability is a fact question beyond the purview of an attorney general opinion.

Very truly yours,

GREG ABBOTT
Attorney General of Texas

DANIEL T. HODGE
First Assistant Attorney General

JAMES D. BLACKLOCK
Deputy Attorney General for Legal Counsel

VIRGINIA K. HOELSCHER
Chair, Opinion Committee

Charlotte M. Harper
Assistant Attorney General, Opinion Committee

[1] See Letter from Honorable Ryan Guillen, Chair, Comm. on Culture, Rec. & Tourism, to Honorable Greg Abbott, Tex. Att'y Gen. at 1 (May 17, 2013), http://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opin ("Request Letter").