How Duty of Care Affects Negligence Claims in Texas

Whether a duty exists is a question of law. That means a judge decides it, not a jury.

Most of the time, the answer is easy. Texas has long recognized duties for drivers, property owners, employers, and many others. When a known rule already covers the situation, the court applies it, and the question is settled.

When no rule covers the situation, Texas courts weigh a set of factors from a 1990 Texas Supreme Court case, Greater Houston Transportation Co. v. Phillips. The court looks at:

• How foreseeable the harm was and how likely an injury was
• The social value of what the defendant was doing
• How hard it would have been to guard against the injury
• What would happen if the law placed this burden on the defendant
• Whether one side knew more about the risk or had the right to control the person who caused the harm

Foreseeability matters most, but it isn’t enough by itself. In 2023, the Texas Supreme Court applied these factors in a Houston case, Houston Area Safety Council v. Mendez. The court assumed the worker’s harm was foreseeable but still refused to create a new duty for the drug-testing companies involved.

What this means for you: If your case fits a well-known duty, like a driver’s duty on the road, this step is usually simple. If it doesn’t, such as a claim against a company that wasn’t directly involved in the accident, duty can become the biggest fight in the case. That’s something we look at closely before we take on a case.

When a Law Sets the Duty: Negligence Per Se

Sometimes a safety law sets the duty for you. Texas calls this negligence per se. If someone breaks a law that was written to protect people like you, and that causes the kind of harm the law was meant to prevent, the violation can prove the breach.

Left turns are a common example. Under Texas Transportation Code § 545.152, a driver turning left must yield to oncoming traffic that is close enough to be a hazard. A driver who turns in front of an oncoming car has broken a duty the Legislature already wrote down.

Drunk driving is another. Driving while intoxicated breaks Texas law, and in drunk driving accident claims that violation can help prove breach. It may also support a claim for punitive damages.

Breach: When Someone Falls Short

Once duty is established, the next question is breach. Did the person act the way a reasonably careful person would have? Breach can be something someone did, like speeding, or something they failed to do, like fixing a broken stair.

Evidence that often proves breach includes:

• Police crash reports and scene photos
• Surveillance, dashcam, and phone video
• Witness statements
• Truck “black box” and electronic logging data
• Maintenance records, safety policies, and training files
• Accident reconstruction by experts

A lot of this evidence doesn’t last. Video gets recorded over. Vehicles get repaired or scrapped. That’s why our approach has always been to investigate early and prepare every case carefully, as if a jury may decide it.

Causation and Damages

Proving someone was careless isn’t enough. You also have to show their carelessness caused your injury. Texas calls this proximate cause, and it has two parts:

• Cause in fact: The breach was a substantial factor in causing the harm, and the harm wouldn’t have happened without it.
• Foreseeability: A reasonable person could have expected this kind of harm to result.

Then come damages, the losses you can recover. These can include medical bills, future care, lost wages, reduced earning ability, pain and suffering, disfigurement, and disability. In fatal cases, families face similar questions when proving liability in a wrongful death claim.

A tip from Greg Baumgartner: Get medical care right away and follow through until your doctor releases you. Gaps or delays in treatment are one of the things insurance adjusters look for. They use them to argue that your injuries weren’t caused by the accident or aren’t as serious as you say.