Medina v. Fuller
126 N.M. 460, 1999 NMCA 011, 971 P.2d 851 (1998)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A public employee driving an employer-assigned vehicle home from work while on-call and subject to immediate response is generally considered within the 'scope of duties' under the Tort Claims Act, even if briefly deviating for a minor personal errand, because the activity facilitates the governmental entity's business.
Facts:
- On July 2, 1993, Defendant Sanchez, a Doña Ana County Deputy Sheriff, was driving her assigned, unmarked police unit home from work.
- Approximately ten minutes after leaving work, Defendant Sanchez was involved in an accident with Plaintiff Lozoya.
- Defendant Sanchez had stopped to visit her husband at his place of employment.
- After leaving her husband's workplace to continue home, Defendant Sanchez recalled leaving an item (which may have been personal) and turned her vehicle around to retrieve it.
- The Sheriff's Department policy for take-home vehicles stated they were for 'official departmental business' but allowed 'ON-CALL Investigators' to use units for 'personal business' as long as they were 'immediately available to respond to any situation'.
- Defendant Sanchez was a supervisor and was considered on-call 24 hours a day by the then-Sheriff, who testified that officers remained on-duty while commuting until they arrived home and notified dispatch.
- Defendant Sanchez stated that while driving her police unit to and from work, she had her badge and gun on, her radio on, and was available to respond to calls.
- At the time of the accident, Defendant Sanchez was not on her way to a crime scene nor had she been dispatched.
Procedural Posture:
- Plaintiff Lozoya filed a lawsuit against Defendant Sanchez more than two years after the accident occurred.
- The trial court ruled as a matter of law that Defendant Sanchez was acting within the scope of her duties at the time of the accident.
- The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Defendant Sanchez.
- Plaintiff Lozoya appealed the trial court's grant of summary judgment.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a public employee, who is a supervisor and considered on-call 24 hours a day, fall within the 'scope of duties' under the Tort Claims Act when driving an employer-assigned police unit home from work, even after making a brief personal stop and turning around to retrieve an item?
Opinions:
Majority - Pickard, J.
Yes, a public employee, like Deputy Sanchez, falls within the 'scope of duties' under the Tort Claims Act when driving an employer-assigned police unit home from work, even after making a brief personal stop and turning around to retrieve an item. The court reasoned that the Tort Claims Act defines 'scope of duties' as performing any duties requested, required, or authorized by the governmental entity, regardless of time and place. The Sheriff's Department policy and the testimony of Defendant Sanchez and her supervisor established that she was authorized, if not required, to use the take-home vehicle to facilitate her investigative and immediate response duties. The court emphasized that the governmental entity derived a tangible benefit from this arrangement, as it ensured supervisors like Sanchez were continuously available for duty. Applying common law principles of 'scope of employment' also supported this conclusion, noting that a minor, foreseeable deviation (like retrieving a personal item) did not constitute a 'substantial deviation' from employment, especially given the continuous on-duty status while commuting in a police unit. The court concluded that a rational fact finder could not find Defendant Sanchez's act 'entirely' personal given the requirement to be on duty and responsive to calls.
Concurring - Hartz, C.J.
Concur.
Concurring - Wechsler, J.
Concur.
Analysis:
This case significantly clarifies the interpretation of 'scope of duties' under the New Mexico Tort Claims Act, extending governmental liability to commutes of on-call public employees using employer-provided vehicles. By harmonizing the statutory definition with common law 'scope of employment' principles, the court established a precedent where employer benefit and control over vehicle use can define the scope of duty. This broadens the circumstances under which a governmental entity may be held responsible for the torts of its employees, particularly for law enforcement personnel. It impacts future cases by providing a framework for analyzing immunity waivers for public safety officers who are expected to maintain readiness outside of traditional work hours.
