Mendez v. Houston Harris Area Safety Council, Inc.

Guillermo Mendez (plaintiff) worked as a pipefitter for Turnaround Welding Services, Inc. (Turnaround). Turnaround assigned Mendez to work at a jobsite for Turnaround’s customer, Valero. Valero required all employees assigned to the jobsite to undergo drug testing, so Mendez reported to Houston Area Safety Council, Inc. (HASC) (defendant) to provide urine and hair samples to be tested. An HASC employee cut a hair sample from Mendez’s chest and sent the hair sample to drug-testing laboratory Psychemedics, Inc. (defendant) for testing. Mendez’s sample tested positive for cocaine. Shortly after the testing, Mendez reported to Valero and began working. A Valero employee subsequently told Mendez that he needed to provide another hair sample for additional drug screening. The second hair sample tested negative for cocaine. However, Turnaround terminated Mendez based on the original positive drug test. Turnaround told Mendez that he could return to work if Mendez “fixed the issue,” so Mendez obtained a third drug test from a different laboratory at his own expense. Mendez’s third hair sample tested negative for cocaine. Mendez also completed a substance-abuse course and received mental-health services. Turnaround allowed Mendez to return to work but never reassigned him to the Valero jobsite or any other jobsite. Mendez sued HASC and Psychemedics, alleging that the companies had been negligent in administering and analyzing the first hair-sample test and that the companies’ negligence had cost Mendez his job. Psychemedics and HASC moved for summary judgment, arguing that they owed no duty of care to Mendez under Texas law. The trial court agreed and granted the motions for summary judgment. Mendez appealed.