The Honorable Joe Earnest County Attorney Mitchell County P. 0. Box 443 Colorado City, Texas 79512 Opinion No. H- 139 Re: Whether County prisoners

may work on county roads, etc., and if so, how may the county protect itself Dear Mr. Earnest: from, lawsuits ifprisoners sustaininjuries?. You have asked for our opinion concerning two questions. involving voluntary work of county jail prisoners: ‘(1) May they.work on county roads, the cour.thopse grounds and incounty cemeteries; and.(Z) Should aprisoner, while doing such work susmid injury, how is the county protected from lawsuits? “
. ., .. Inansweri&tl&e questions;.we aa&me that the .cemeteries towhich you refer are county-owned cemeteries. Ifnot, our answer as to **them,** would be that county prisoners could not be used on other than county cemeteries. See, for instance, Attorney General Opinion No. 1061(1939). Inanswer toyour first inquiry you are advised that the county may initiate programs for,prisoners towork maintaining and repairing county-owned property on avoluntary, basis. Your other inquiry ‘concerns possible lawsuits against the county. Your county, of course, is protected from liability for injuries sustained by **reason** ofthe tortious or negligent acts of its agents and employees by the doctrine of sovereign immunity. 15Tex. Jur. 2d, Counties, 8 

### 106. The only exception to this is set forth inArticle 6252-19, Vernon’s Texas Civil Statutes, the Texas Tort Claims Act, which provides for the liability ofa “unit ofgovernment”
. including counties, under two circumstances set out in $3ofthe Act: (1) for personal injuries or death caused by anegligent act or omission of a county employee acting within the scope ofhis employment and “arising from the operation or use of amotor-driven vehicle and motor-driven equipment;” and (2) under circumstances where the unit ofgovernment, ifa private person would be personally liable for injuries or death caused from some condition ofuse of “tangible property, real or personal. ”

p. 

### 663The Honorable Joe Earnest, page 2 (H-139)

Itis our opinion that the liability imposed by this Act upon a county for injuries to a prisoner while performing work for the county is no different from that imposed uponthe county for injuries to aprisoner while he is notworking which, inturn, may be no different from the liability imposed for injury to any other person. Dancer v. City of Houston, 384 S.W. 2d 340 (Tex. 1964). The county may protect itself from lawsuits growing out of aliability inthose cases where enactment ofthe Texas Tort Claims Act has abrogated its immunity from liability for tort by the purchase ofliab.ility insurance. Attorney General Opinion No. WW-813 (~1960). M-989(1971) and see Letter Advisory No. 24 (1973) andAttorney General Opinion No. H-70 (1973). SUMMARY

A commissioners court may allow county prisoners towork repairing and maintaining county property and, the county is immune from liability to such prisoners except under circumstances wherein the Texas Tort Claims Act would be applicable. inwhich event itmay be protected by liability insurance. Very truly yours,

JOHN L. HILL // Attorney Ganeral.of Texas

DAVID M KENDALL, Chairman Opinion Committee
p. 664