Government Liability

Indiana and Illinois roads, like those in any state, can present challenges for drivers due to a combination of traffic, changing weather conditions, and the occasional human error. Even the most experienced and well-trained drivers are not immune to making mistakes, and this includes law enforcement officers, who spend a significant amount of time behind the wheel while working to ensure public safety. Unfortunately, accidents involving police vehicles are not uncommon. Recently, a crash involving a police cruiser in Chicago resulted in two people being sent to the hospital with injuries, highlighting the risks that all road users face.

The accident occurred at the intersection of 169th and Southeastern Avenue around 7:45 p.m. A vehicle traveling southbound on Southeastern ran a red light, colliding with the westbound squad car. Preliminary reports indicate that the police were not at fault in this case. However, it’s important to note that police officers, whether on duty or off, are not infallible. They, too, can make mistakes or act negligently, resulting in accidents. Pursuing a personal injury claim against a police officer or their department can be particularly challenging due to the legal complexities involved, including qualified immunity.

Qualified immunity often shields government employees, such as police officers, from liability in certain situations, especially when they are acting within the scope of their official duties. However, this protection does not mean they are above the law. Officers can still be held accountable if their actions are proven negligent or reckless. When an officer is at fault in an accident during the course of their work, the jurisdiction they work for—whether a city, county, or state—may bear responsibility for the claim. If the officer is off duty, this immunity generally does not apply, and the case proceeds much like any other auto accident claim.

Recently, an Indiana high appeals court issued an opinion hinging on the scope of governmental immunity. In this case, an accident victim tried to sue an Indiana state trooper after they were involved in an accident. The state trooper was not on duty when the accident occurred but was driving a state police-issued vehicle, commonly called a “commission.” As such, the state trooper argued that he was not liable under the Indiana Tort Claims Act (ITCA). On appeal, the plaintiff argued that the office was personally responsible as his acts were “clearly outside the scope” of his employment.

Here, the state police issued the trooper his commission, which was subject to police standard operating procedures (SOP). The SOP provided guidelines for operating the vehicle when the vehicle was on or off-duty and during emergency and non-emergency situations. The SOP requires troopers to maintain radio contact even while off-duty, avoid violating traffic laws, unless necessary, and respond to emergency situations. Further, the SOP authorized troopers to use their commission, on a minimal basis, for their transportation.

On the day of the accident, the trooper completed his shift, went home to shower, and left in his commission to go to his son’s baseball game. While he was driving southbound to his son’s game, he attempted to pass the vehicle in front of him by crossing into the northbound lane. As he transitioned to the opposite lane, he saw a motorcycle approaching and quickly moved back into his lane. However, the motorcycle driver did not have enough time to slow down and ended up abruptly locking his brakes, which caused his vehicle to roll over and eject both he and his passenger. In response to the motorcyclist’s personal injury claim, the trooper argued that he was immune under the ITCA, because he was within the scope of his employment.

Articles Posted in Government Liability

Officer-Involved Crash Sends Two to the Hospital

Appellate Court Addresses Scope of Governmental Immunity in Indiana Personal Injury Claim