Articles Posted in Automobile Accidents

According to the Texas Department of Transportation, each year 17,500 people are seriously injured in Texas car accidents. Human nature is such that most of us operate under the assumption that we will never be included in that statistic. However, the reality is that a car accident occurs in Texas every 59 seconds, and someone is injured in an accident nearly every two minutes.

Knowing what to do in the aftermath of a serious car accident is essential knowledge that all drivers should possess. The moments after a car accident are incredibly stressful, and many motorists go into autopilot mode, relying on their instincts rather than thinking through the situation as they usually would. Thus, it is important that Texas motorists commit the following essential “to dos” to memory.

1. Stop, even if it wasn’t your fault – Even in the event of a minor accident, stop to evaluate the damage. The body has a remarkable way of masking pain in the moments immediately following a traumatic event. Motorists who brush off a minor accident may wake up a few days later with significant pain or other related issues.

Earlier this month, a lawsuit was filed against The Weather Channel based on a 2017 Texas car accident that claimed the lives of all three men involved. According to a recent news report, the lawsuit seeks $125 million for the wrongful death of the accident victim, and was filed against The Weather Channel because the accident was allegedly caused by two of its employees.

Back in March of 2017, two storm chasers were filming footage for The Weather Channel show, “Storm Wranglers.” According to the plaintiff’s complaint, their vehicle ran a stop sign and collided with the vehicle of a 25-year-old storm spotter who was employed by the National Weather Service. At the time of the accident, it is claimed that the men were traveling at approximately 70 miles per hour. The force from the crash propelled the satellite equipment atop one of the vehicles over a five-foot fence, ultimately landing 150 feet away from the scene of the accident. All three men died as a result of the collision.

Family members of the deceased accident victim filed a case against The Weather Channel, claiming that the two men had a “well-documented history of dangerous behavior behind the wheel” that the Channel ignored and may have even encouraged. Family members claimed that The Weather Channel had knowledge of the men’s poor driving habits and encouraged them to run stop signs and violate other traffic laws to obtain exciting footage that could be included in the show. The complaint further alleges that The Weather Channel had ample opportunity to replace the men with “competent, law-abiding” drivers, but failed to do so.

One of the first considerations in a Texas car accident case is which of the parties involved should be named as defendants. This is an important decision for several reasons. First, failing to name a potentially liable party could result in the named defendants shifting blame onto the unnamed party. Second, given the low insurance requirements in Texas, an accident victim can very easily sustain more serious injuries than can be recovered under a single insurance policy.

Of course, only parties that were potentially negligent can be named in a Texas personal injury case. However, it is a common misconception that the at-fault driver is the only negligent party. In many cases, an at-fault driver was not the owner of the vehicle involved in the accident and was permitted to use the vehicle by a friend, family member, or employer. This is where the doctrine of negligent entrustment comes in.

The doctrine of negligent entrustment allows an injury victim to hold the owner of a vehicle liable for negligently allowing another person to use the vehicle. Under Texas case law, a plaintiff must be able to establish:

• The owner entrusted the vehicle to the driver;
• The driver was unlicensed, reckless, or incompetent;
• The owner knew the driver was unlicensed, reckless, or incompetent;
• The driver was negligent; and
• The driver’s negligence caused the plaintiff’s injuries.

Continue reading →

Recently, a state appellate court issued a written opinion in a Texas car accident case discussing whether the plaintiff’s case against an allegedly negligent driver’s employer should proceed to trial where the accident occurred while the employee was not on-the-clock. Ultimately, the court concluded that the defendant employer’s no-evidence motion was properly granted because the plaintiff could not establish that the driver was acting in the performance of his duties as an employee of the defendant at the time of the accident.

The Facts of the Case

The plaintiff was injured when a truck collided with his vehicle. The plaintiff initially filed a lawsuit against the driver, but later withdrew that case after filing a lawsuit against the driver’s employer. The plaintiff claimed that the employer was vicariously liable for the plaintiff’s injuries.

The evidence showed that the employee had recently left the work site for the day, and was giving a co-worker a ride back to his hotel. On the way back from the job site, the employee stopped to show his co-worker the site of a future job. As the employee turned into the future job site, he struck the plaintiff’s car. It was also established that the defendant paid for the employee’s gas.

Continue reading →

Recently, a federal appellate court issued an opinion in a case that was filed against several parties, including the city of Austin, Texas, following a fatal traffic accident that occurred during the South By Southwest (SXSW) festival. According to the court’s opinion, a drunk driver who was fleeing police drove through a block that had been closed off for the festival, killing four people. One of the victim’s family members filed a Texas wrongful death claim against the city and the festival organizers, claiming that the defendants failed to adequately block off the street to protect festival-goers.

The court dismissed each of the plaintiff’s claims against each of the defendants. First, the court determined that the family failed to show that the festival organizers controlled the area where the victim was killed. A city generally owns the public roads, but the family alleged that the festival organizers had a city permit that made it the occupier of the area where the driver was killed. However, the court pointed out that the right-of-way permit, which was attached as an exhibit, stated that all traffic controls had to be provided “in accordance with the approved traffic control plan.” The city-approved traffic control plan stated that the block was open to regular vehicular traffic. Therefore, the city still controlled the street, and the festival organizers had no duty to act.

Next, the court went on to determine that the city was immune from liability. Under Texas law, a municipality is generally immune from suit under the longstanding principles of governmental immunity. However, while a city is immune for torts that are committed while in the “performance of its governmental functions,” it is not immune for torts “committed in the performance of its proprietary functions.”

Continue reading →