What started as a routine pizza delivery in downtown Houston has turned into a high-stakes court battle for Domino's. The company is asking a Harris County judge to throw out a negligence lawsuit after a delivery driver allegedly stabbed a man nine times while out on a November 23, 2024 delivery. A hearing on Domino's motion for summary judgment is set for Monday, July 20, 2026. The lawsuit claims the attack happened during a delivery and that Domino's should be held responsible for choosing to rehire the driver.
What the suit says
According to the Houston Chronicle, plaintiffs Chadi and Carina Mezayek say delivery driver Jeremy Russell stabbed Chadi nine times as the couple walked home from dinner. Russell was allegedly riding an e-bike and carrying two pizzas at the time. The filing, as described by the Chronicle, says Domino's rehired Russell in 2024 even though the company had rejected him in 2022 after a background check turned up prior violent felony convictions. The lawsuit further claims a hiring manager later "misread" Russell's background report and misunderstood the phrase "felon in possession of a weapon," which plaintiffs say cleared the way for him to be brought back on.
How Texas law treats employer liability
Under Texas law, there is a key distinction between holding an employer vicariously liable for an employee's conduct within the course and scope of employment and bringing direct claims such as negligent hiring or negligent supervision. Those direct theories can apply when an employer knew or should have known that an employee posed a particular danger. Texas courts have explained that negligent-hiring and negligent-supervision claims focus on whether the employer had notice of a risk and the chance to control the employee, an approach discussed in state precedent summarized in Pagayon v. Exxon Mobil.
What to watch at Monday's hearing
Domino's position is that Russell was acting outside the scope of his employment when the stabbing occurred, and the company asked the court in June to end the negligence case before it ever reaches a jury. If the judge refuses to grant summary judgment, the lawsuit will move a step closer to trial, as the Chronicle reports. Chadi Mezayek told the Chronicle he is pushing for policy changes, and his attorney, Omar Chawdhary, argued that hiring a known violent criminal "created a ticking time bomb" for someone in Houston.
Legal implications
When ruling on a motion for summary judgment, a judge must decide whether any genuine disputes of material fact exist that require a jury to sort them out. If not, the court can resolve the case without a trial, as outlined in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56. Plaintiffs bringing negligent-hiring, negligent-retention, or negligent-supervision claims must show that the employer knew or should have known about the employee's unfitness and had the ability to exercise control, an inquiry that Texas courts have framed in recent decisions, including those discussed in Pagayon v. Exxon Mobil.
The upcoming hearing in Harris County district court will go a long way toward deciding whether the Mezayeks' negligence claims continue into full discovery and a potential jury trial or end at the summary-judgment stage. Once the judge issues a ruling, the decision and any next steps will be reflected in the court records filed in the case.
