B.W.D. v. Turnage
Dallas Court of Appeals, No. 05-13-01733-CV (March 2, 2015)
Justices Myers (Opinion), Stoddart, and Schenck
A family court ordered B.W.D. to undergo random drug and alcohol tests as part of a child custody dispute. The court appointed Turnage and his company, Forensic DNA and Drug Testing Services, to conduct those tests. Turnage concluded that certain of B.W.D.’s samples were diluted, and therefore were “failed” tests, which led the family court to impose onerous restrictions on B.W.D. B.W.D. sued Turnage and others, asserting negligence and various other claims, because they had not followed established federal guidelines for determining whether a drug testing sample is “diluted”—even though the court’s order did not specify any particular standard or protocol for deciding what constituted a diluted sample. The defendants moved for summary judgment, relying in part on “derived judicial immunity.” The trial court granted that motion, and the Dallas Court of Appeals affirmed.
“Derived judicial immunity” arises when a judge delegates authority or appoints others to perform services for the court. “A person entitled to derived judicial immunity receives the same absolute immunity from liability for acts performed within the scope of his jurisdiction as a judge.” Following the Texas Supreme Court’s reasoning in Dallas County v. Halsey, the Court of Appeals applied the “functional” test to determine whether the defendants were entitled to derived judicial immunity—i.e., (i) “whether the activities of the person seeking immunity are intimately associated with the judicial process,” and (ii) “whether the person exercised discretionary judgment comparable to a judge, as opposed to ministerial or administrative tasks.” The Court held both prongs of the test satisfied here. The family court’s order delegated its authority to Turnage to conduct and interpret the drug tests without reference to any specific standard, leaving such interpretation and decisions to their discretion. Consequently, the defendants were entitled to absolute immunity against B.W.D.’s claims.
