RulesofCivilProcedure.com Civil Procedure · Every State

§ 101.065.Negligence of Off-Duty Law Enforcement Officers

Title 5. Governmental Liability · Chapter 101. Tort Claims · Subchapter C. Exclusions and Exceptions · Last amended 1997 · Last verified August 29, 2026

In one sentenceSection 101.065 excludes claims based on the conduct of a Department of Public Safety officer who was not on active duty, whether or not in uniform.

Full Text of § 101.065

Text size

This chapter does not apply to the wrongful act or omission or the negligence of an officer commissioned by the Department of Public Safety if the officer was not on active duty at the time the act, omission, or negligence occurred. This section applies without regard to whether the officer was wearing a uniform purchased under Section 411.0078, Government Code, at the time the act, omission, or negligence occurred.
End

Plain-English Summary

A short exclusion turning on duty status rather than appearance.

The chapter does not apply to the wrongful act or omission or the negligence of an officer commissioned by the Department of Public Safety if the officer was not on active duty when it occurred. The section applies without regard to whether the officer was wearing a uniform purchased under the Government Code provision at the time.

The uniform clause forecloses the natural argument. A commissioned officer in uniform looks like they are working, and a claimant would otherwise contend that the uniform placed them within the scope of employment. The section says appearance does not decide it.

The exclusion also fits the Act's general structure. The waiver requires an employee acting within the scope of employment, and an officer off duty is generally outside it. This section confirms the result for one category rather than leaving it to be argued.

The claimant is not left without recourse — the officer remains personally liable for their own conduct like any other person. What the section removes is the state's liability for it.

Note the reference to a uniform purchased under a specific Government Code provision, which contemplates officers buying their own uniforms and using them off duty, often in secondary employment.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Texas liable for an off-duty DPS officer?

No. The chapter does not apply to the wrongful act, omission, or negligence of a commissioned DPS officer who was not on active duty.

What if the officer was in uniform?

It makes no difference. The section applies without regard to whether the officer was wearing a uniform at the time.

Can I sue the officer personally?

The section removes the state's liability. It does not address the officer's own personal liability for their conduct.

Amendment History

  • Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 738, Sec. 2, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.
  • Renumbered from Civil Practice and Remedies Code Sec. 101.058 by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 165, Sec. 31.01(9), eff. Sept. 1, 1997.
Source & verification. Section text is reproduced verbatim from Texas Legislature Online (statutes.capitol.texas.gov). Enacted by the Texas Legislature. Current through May 14, 2026. Last verified August 29, 2026. · Official source