Wrongful Death Category Archives — Page 3 of 8 — Texas Injury Lawyer Blog Published by East Texas Injury Attorney

February 6, 2017

Texas Court Affirms Summary Judgment in Favor of At-Fault Motorist’s Employer

The primary reasoning behind the civil tort of negligence is that those who fail to act in a reasonably prudent manner should be held accountable to those hurt by their actions (or inactions).

Just as direct negligence can be used to hold a careless individual liable in court, vicarious liability (sometimes known as respondeat superior) can be used to hold an employer responsible for the conduct of an employee.

Of course, not every action by a worker amounts to liability for the company for which he or she works. A recent case explored the law in Texas with respect to this issue.

September 30, 2016

Texas Appellate Court Lacked Jurisdiction Over Private Company’s Appeal of Denial of Summary Judgment Based on Immunity – Aecom USA, Inc. v. Mata

by Earl Drott

In order for a trial court to adjudicate a case, it must have jurisdiction (both personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction) over the matter at hand. The same is true for an appellate court. It also must have jurisdiction over an appeal before it may proceed.

The mere fact that a lawsuit has been filed in a trial court (or an appeal taken to the court of appeals) is not enough. The court must have the legal authority to act, or else its decision will be invalid. Recently, a Texas appellate court was called upon to determine an interlocutory appeal in a case in which a private company that had contracted with the Texas Department of Transportation sought interlocutory review of a trial court’s denial of its motion for summary judgment based on immunity. First, the court had to determine whether it had jurisdiction over the appeal.

June 17, 2016

Texas Court Holds that Trucker’s Employer is Possible “Responsible Third Party” in Product Liability Suit Arising from Truck Braking System – In re Volvo Group North America

by Earl Drott

Truck accidents hurt or kill thousands of motorists, passengers, and pedestrians each year. Sometimes, even truckers themselves perish in these accidents.

A recent case illustrates the challenges that arose when a deceased trucker’s family attempted to seek compensation for their loved one’s wrongful death in a lawsuit that claimed a particular braking system caused the trucker to lose control and plunge off an overpass.

May 31, 2016

Felony Murder Charge Follows Motorcycle Fatality in East Texas

by Earl Drott

When a driver’s negligence or recklessness causes a vehicular accident that results in an injury or death, the at-fault driver can be held financially liable for damages resulting from the accident. In personal injury cases, these damages include lost wages, medical expenses, pain and suffering, and more. In wrongful death cases, the deceased accident victim’s family may be able to recover funeral and burial expenses, lost companionship and society, and other damages.

In addition to a civil lawsuit sounding in negligence, there may also be a criminal prosecution if the at-fault driver’s conduct was more than simple negligence. Typically, the criminal case does not yield any financial recovery for the accident victim (although the court may order the defendant to pay reparations in some cases), but a finding of guilt in the criminal case can be of assistance in proving fault in the civil case.

The decision to bring criminal charges after a motor vehicle accident rests with the State, namely the police and the district attorney. The exact charges depend upon the facts of the accident.

March 10, 2016

Texas Court Dismisses Widower’s Claims Against Driver’s Employer Based on Negligent Entrustment and Vicarious Liability – Martinez v. Arafa

by Earl Drott

When pursing a personal injury case against a negligent or reckless driver, it is in the plaintiff’s best interests to thoroughly investigate all theories of liability and identify all potential defendants prior to filing suit. If the driver was employed and arguably “on the job” at the time of the collision, his or her employer may be named in the lawsuit in addition to the driver himself or herself. In many cases, the employer has “deeper pockets” (i.e., more assets or higher insurance coverage limits), so a finding of liability can result in a more adequate financial recovery for the injured person.

Of course, the employer may have an argument that the employee was not acting in the course of employment at the time of the accident, thus relieving the employer of potential liability under a theory of respondeat superior (by which the master may be held liable for the torts of the servant). The employer may also have possible defenses against an allegation of negligent entrustment or another cause of action by the injured person.

March 1, 2016

Recovering Maximum Damages in Texas Can Be Difficult Without a Prompt and Thorough Investigation Into the Cause of a Crash

by Earl Drott

One of the most important reasons to contact an attorney as soon as possible after a car accident is so that the injured person, or the family in the case of a fatal accident, can be represented during the critical investigation phase of the case. Since the negligent party’s insurance company typically has representatives working on the case from the moment that the insured gives notice of the wreck, the plaintiff can be at a substantial disadvantage if he or she waits weeks or months before talking to a lawyer.

While it would be nice to assume that insurance companies “do the right thing” and pay out settlements when fault is obvious, this is rarely the case. Insurance companies stay profitable by looking out for the bottom line, not by doing what is fair to injured people. Even when liability is clear, there is still the matter of the amount of damages sustained by the plaintiff, especially if punitive damages are at issue.

February 1, 2016

Texas Court Lacked Personal Jurisdiction Over Canadian Corporation in Wrongful Death Lawsuit for Worker’s Death – Bautista v. Trinidad Drilling Limited

by Earl Drott

Before a court can render judgment in a lawsuit, it must have both subject matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction. Subject matter jurisdiction, also called in rem jurisdiction, refers to the general category (i.e., subject matter) of the case. For instance, a state probate court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over a federal criminal matter, and a Texas state court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to determine a boundary line dispute arising in Tennessee.

In addition to subject matter jurisdiction, a court must also have personal jurisdiction over the parties to the suit. Jurisdiction over the “person” includes not only individuals but also corporations. If a court lacks personal jurisdiction over a party, it cannot render a judgment against that party, regardless of the merits of the plaintiff’s claim.

September 9, 2015

Texas Court Upholds Governmental Immunity in Negligence Action

by Earl Drott

The success of any motor vehicle negligence case depends in large part on the facts surrounding the accident and the knowledge and experience of the plaintiff’s counsel. In order to state a claim on which relief may be granted, the injured victim must also anticipate and address any potential defenses that the defendant could assert. Properly assessing one’s case and preparing a strong strategy can make a huge difference in a plaintiff’s recovery. For these reasons, if you have been injured in a car accident, it is vital that you contact an experienced and knowledgeable injury attorney from the local East Texas area as soon as possible.

A recent Texas court of appeals case nicely illustrates the importance of understanding how procedural laws can affect the course of a negligence case. In Northcutt v. City of Hearne, the plaintiff brought a personal injury case against the City (on behalf of the deceased – James H. Bell), seeking wrongful death and survival damages. According to the complaint, the plaintiff alleged that Bell was driving his motorcycle on Highway 79 when an Officer was on the side of the road in a private driveway, setting up a “speed trap.” The Officer turned on his lights and drove onto the shoulder of the road, allegedly causing Bell to swerve to avoid a collision.

July 15, 2015

Farmers Insurance Group Guilty Of Texas Deceptive Trade Practices And Consumer Protection Act Violations

by Earl Drott

Farmers Insurance Group has agreed to pay $84,000,000 in damages to settle a 2002 lawsuit which alleged that Farmers violated the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act as well as the Texas Insurance Code by charging unaware policy holders higher premiums for less coverage. The Texas Department of Insurance joined in the lawsuit.
For more information contact www.earldrottlaw.com.

June 18, 2015

Texas Wrongful Death Laws Out Of Step With 21st Century Society

by Earl Drott

The Texas Wrongful Death statutes fail to compensate many legitimate injuries while preserving the right to make a claim of many who have no damages. One example is the case of Syleta Harkins. In July of 2013 Syleta Harkins, an autistic, nonverbal, disabled adult, was left in a group home van and died. Harkins had never married and had no children. Her parents predeceased her. Under Texas law only parents, spouses and children may bring a wrongful death claim. Harkins’ siblings loved and cared for her but siblings have no wrongful death rights under Texas law. Texas law fails to recognized the traumatic effect of the loss of a sibling.

Texas law likewise fails to protect partners in long term, family-like relationships. The couple who lives together for decades and raises a family together has absolutely no wrongful death rights if one of the partners is killed by the negligence of a drunk truck driver.

Another equally unjust situation arises when a child who is being raised by grandparents is killed in an auto accident. The grandparents, who have a close, parent-like, familial relationship with their grandchild and will suffer until their dying breathes, have absolutely no wrongful death rights while the biological father, who oftentimes may never have laid eyes on the child and is nothing more than a sperm donor, has a right under Texas law to wrongful death damages.