Under TCPRC 7.003, what must be proven for an officer to be held liable?

• A. That a reasonably prudent officer would not have acted in the same way
• B. That the officer intended to cause harm
• C. That the officer violated a federal statute
• D. That the case was filed in district court

Answer: (A)

The main idea here is the standard for official immunity under TCPRC 7.003. Liability depends on whether the officer’s actions were objectively reasonable under the circumstances. If a reasonably prudent officer would not have acted the same way, then the officer can be held liable; if the actions were reasonable for a officer in that situation, the officer is protected from liability. This focus on what a reasonable officer would do eliminates consideration of the officer’s intent or any federal statutes, and it isn’t about where a case is filed. So the required proof is that the conduct was not what a reasonably prudent officer would have done.