RALEIGH, N.C. — The mother of a university student from North Carolina, who tragically lost his life during a ride-along in a Highway Patrol vehicle, has been allowed to proceed with her lawsuit alleging gross negligence against the trooper involved in the incident. On Wednesday, a state appeals court delivered a ruling reversing a lower court’s decision that had previously dismissed the case brought on behalf of the deceased Michael Higgins against Trooper Omar Romero Mendoza.
In a split decision of 2-1, judges from the intermediate-level state Court of Appeals determined that the lawsuit, filed in 2022 by Lisa Higgins, the administrator of her son’s estate, could continue. Higgins was a 22-year-old criminal justice major at East Carolina University participating in a patrol internship program when the incident occurred in August 2020. During a pursuit, Mendoza, who is referred to as Romero in patrol documents, lost control while traveling over 110 mph (about 177 kph), crashing into a utility pole and colliding with two trees, resulting in Higgins’ fatal injuries.
Lisa Higgins initially sought damages not only from Romero but also from Trooper Brandon Cesar Cruz, who had encouraged her son to join Romero for the ride-along that evening, as Cruz was unable to escort Higgins himself. However, in 2023, Superior Court Judge William Wolfe dismissed the lawsuit against both officers, with Cruz being dropped from the appeal last year by Lisa Higgins.
Before this incident, Higgins had successfully participated in two ride-alongs with other patrol officers; however, the ruling majority indicated that Higgins was unaware that neither Romero nor Cruz had the proper ranks or titles needed to conduct a ride-along as per protocol. On the night of the incident, Romero and Higgins responded to a call where a vehicle had left the road and ended up in a ditch. Cruz was also involved and suggested that Romero pursue a suspected intoxicated driver in the vicinity.
As the pursuit ensued, Romero activated his sirens and lights, speeding down the two-lane road with Higgins as a passenger. He asserted during a deposition that he misjudged the road’s path, believing it to be straight instead of curving. A patrol report later indicated that Romero had violated protocols concerning how to initiate a traffic enforcement response.
Romero’s lawyer contended that, being a government employee, the trooper was shielded from personal civil liabilities during active pursuits, and such claims against state employees should be directed toward the state Industrial Commission, where monetary awards are limited.
However, Court of Appeals Judge John Arrowood, in the majority opinion, noted that the legal exemptions for law enforcement in high-speed pursuits do not absolve them from recklessly endangering the safety of others. He emphasized that the evidence compiled suggested a substantial issue exists as to whether Romero’s actions amounted to gross negligence. “A jury should decide if Romero’s actions were unnecessary or showed a reckless indifference to Michael’s rights,” Arrowood stated.
Judge Allegra Collins concurred with this viewpoint, while Chief Judge Chris Dillon offered a dissenting opinion. Dillon argued that even if Romero’s decision-making during the pursuit could be seen as negligent, it did not equate to “wanton conduct” done with “corruption or malice.”
The case has the potential to be reviewed by the state Supreme Court upon request. Romero’s legal representative did not respond to inquiries for comments immediately after the ruling. On the other hand, Jim White, an attorney for Lisa Higgins, expressed satisfaction with the court’s decision, commenting on the necessity of holding officers accountable for their actions while on duty. He also suggested that a jury trial might provide a sense of “vindication” for the Higgins family and affirm that Michael Higgins should never have been in the vehicle during that perilous pursuit.
