Texas House Bill HB 1110

Texas 2025 - 89th Regular

• Filed: 11/12/24
• Out of House Committee: 4/9/25

Caption

Relating to a limitation on civil suits against persons reporting suspicious activity in good faith.

Summary

HB 1110 would create a new Chapter 128A in the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code to limit civil lawsuits against people who report suspicious activity to law enforcement. The protection applies only when the reporting person acted as a reasonable person would under similar circumstances and had a reasonable belief that the activity was criminal or in furtherance of a crime, including terrorism. In effect, the bill creates a good-faith reporting shield for certain civilian reports to police or other appropriate law enforcement authorities. The bill applies only to causes of action that accrue on or after its effective date, and it would take effect September 1, 2025. It does not eliminate all liability for reporting suspicious activity; rather, it bars civil actions tied to the report when the statutory reasonableness and good-faith standards are met. The measure is framed as a civil liability limitation, not a criminal law change, and it would affect potential plaintiffs seeking damages or other civil remedies against individuals who make such reports.

Impact

HB 1110 would amend Texas civil law by adding a new statutory defense or bar to civil claims arising from reports of suspicious activity made to law enforcement in good faith. It would provide legal protection to private individuals who report conduct they reasonably believe is criminal, including terrorism-related activity, and would likely reduce exposure to defamation, negligence, or similar civil claims based on those reports. The bill primarily affects potential plaintiffs and reporting individuals, while leaving law enforcement reporting obligations and criminal statutes unchanged.

Sentiment

The available record shows no committee transcript debate and no recorded votes, so there is no direct evidence of strong support or opposition in the provided materials. Based on the bill’s text and caption, the measure appears to be a public-safety and liability-protection bill intended to encourage reporting of suspicious conduct without fear of civil retaliation. The absence of recorded controversy suggests it may have been treated as a relatively straightforward civil immunity measure, though the bill’s reasonableness standard could still draw interest from civil liberties or plaintiff-side advocates.

Contention

The main point of potential contention is the scope of the civil suit limitation and how courts would apply the requirement that the reporter act as a reasonable person and have a reasonable belief that the conduct was criminal or terrorism-related. Supporters would likely emphasize encouraging good-faith reporting and protecting public safety, while critics could worry that the law may shield mistaken, biased, or overbroad reports from civil accountability if the statutory standard is interpreted too broadly. Because the bill text does not include an express malice exception, disputes could also arise over whether the reasonableness test is sufficiently protective against abuse.