Two Years.

Most cases are governed by a two-year statute of limitations.  Cases of personal injuries, wrongful death, damages or loss of property, and other similar claims are valid for two years from the date of the occurrence.  For instance, if you are injured in a car accident, then you have two years from the date of the accident to either settle your case or file your lawsuit against the responsible party.  Otherwise, your rights to any recovery will expire and be lost forever.

Three Years.

Claims for Personal Injury Protection (PIP) benefits are valid for up to three years from the date of the accident.

Four Years.

Cases involving breach of contract are covered by a four-year statute of limitations.  This would also cover claims for uninsured motorist coverage (UM/UIM).  When a person is injured in a car accident, and the other driver or vehicle is uninsured, then you may make a claim under your own policy for uninsured motorist benefits.  Because this coverage is provided under your own insurance policy, it is therefore treated as a contract case.  Therefore, the statute of limitations is four years.

The statute of limitations period for any particular case begins to run after a claim has “accrued.”  A claim accrues once the incident giving rise to the party’s legal claim occurs.  If you are injured in a car accident, then the time period begins to run on the date of the accident.  If the case happens to be for uninsured motorist benefits, then your claim accrues once your have submitted your case to the insurance company and the adjuster either denies your claim or fails to properly evaluate your claim.

If you are unable to settle your case within the applicable time period, then you can preserve your rights if a lawsuit is filed within the statute of limitations.  So long as you diligently prosecute your lawsuit, then your rights to any recovery will remain valid so long as the lawsuit is on file even though the time period has since passed.

There are also other situations where the statute of limitations period may be “tolled.”   Tolling of the statute of limitations means that the applicable time period is extended or suspended.  However, there must be some valid legal exception for the statute of limitations be tolled.  Some examples include the plaintiff being a minor child or the defendant being out of the State of Texas, incarcerated, or on active duty in the military.

Some cases may also have other time periods which apply in addition to the statute of limitations.  If your case is one which involves governmental liability, Texas law provides that the governmental department or agency is entitled to receive written notice of the claim within six (6) months of the incident.  For example, if you are injured in a car accident which a police car or school bus, failure to provide written notice of your claim to the proper governmental agency within six (6) months of the accident will result in your case being barred.

The law regarding the statute of limitations can get very complicated.  This article is only intended to provide a basic overview of the general rules and is not a complete rendition of the law governing any specific case.  But one thing can be certain: If you miss the statute of limitations deadline for your case, then your rights will be forever lost.  Likewise, always consult with an experienced lawyer as soon as possible.

Once the parties have reached a settlement agreement for the minor child, the insurance company refers the case to their attorney who prepares the court papers for a friendly suit.  Once the friendly suit is filed, the judge then appoints an independent  ”guardian ad-litem,” sometimes known as an “attorney ad-litem.”  This person is an attorney appointed by the judge to review and investigate the settlement to determine whether it is in the best interest of the minor child.

Prior to approving the settlement, the ad-litem also reviews the terms of the settlement agreement.  The ad-litem will normally recommend that the settlement proceeds for the minor child be deposited and held in the court’s registry until the child turns eighteen (18) years old.  Sometimes, the parties will agree to have the proceeds placed into a private annuity where the funds might gain a higher rate of interest.  Nevertheless, the funds are to be placed into such a fund for the protection of the minor child.  Likewise, the parents are not permitted any access to these funds.

Once the ad-litem concludes the investigation, the attorney will recommend to the court whether the settlement should or should not be approved.  Unless there is anything out of the ordinary, the ad-litem and the court will normally approve the settlement after a short hearing.  The procedures in a friendly suit are usually very simple and routine.

There may be few situations where the court might permit the parents to invest the minor’s settlement proceeds into an investment of their choice, such as a college savings account.  However, the parents would be required to follow the courts’s order to invest those funds accordingly and not use the funds for their own use.  After all, the purpose of the friendly suit is to protect the minor’s settlement proceeds for the benefit of the minor child.

Once the settlement is approved by the court, then the settlement becomes binding against the minor child.  Likewise, the child cannot reassert any claims arising from the injury.  This is how the insurance company is assured that the settlement is final.  However, a friendly suit costs money.  And since the friendly suit is there for the benefit of the insurance company, then the insurance company pays the costs associated with the friendly suit, including the fees charged by the ad-litem.  Therefore, on smaller settlements, the insurance company may not insist on a friendly suit.  Under these circumstances, the proceeds of the child’s settlement are tendered to the parents and are not legally protected.

First, the owner must “entrust” the vehicle to the driver.  If the car is stolen or the driver takes the vehicle without the owner’s permission, then the owner is not liable for negligent entrustment.  Permission may be express or implied.  If you lend your vehicle to a friend to run some errands, then the owner has given “express” permission.  Another example may include a situation where the owner’s child routinely uses the vehicle to go to work or school without having to ask for permission each and every time.  Under this situation, the owner may be deemed to have given “implied” permission for the child to use the vehicle.

Second, the owner must entrust the vehicle to someone who they knew (or should have known) is an incompetent or unlicensed driver.  For example, if the owner lends their vehicle out to someone who appears to be intoxicated, then the owner may held liable for a resulting car accident.  Additionally, if the driver has had many car accidents or traffic tickets in the recent past, then the driver may be considered incompetent.  If the driver of the vehicle does not have a valid driver’s license, then the owner may also be liable for lending the vehicle to the unlicensed driver.

Third, the driver must be at fault in the car accident.  That is, driver of the vehicle must have caused the accident before the owner may be held liable.  If the driver is not at fault in the accident, then the owner would not be liable for negligent entrustment.  If the driver is unlicensed, then the owner may also be liable even if the owner had no reason to believe that the driver was incompetent.  However, the unlicensed driver would still have to be at-fault in the accident.

Just remember this simple rule:  If you lend your vehicle to someone, and that person causes an accident, you may be held liable if it can be shown that you knew (or should have known) that the driver was incompetent or unlicensed.

“What should I do if I do not want to accept 10% liability that the other insurance company has assessed against me in an auto accident?  I got into an accident.  The other driver’s insurance company accepted 90% fault in the accident.  However, the adjuster assessed 10% fault against me for failing to take proper evasive action and not keeping a proper lookout.  What should I do?”

In this particular claim, the insurance adjuster is assigning 10% negligence in the car accident to the claimant.  The act of attributing negligence to the plaintiff is called contributory negligence.  The act of assigning a percentage to each parties’ negligence is called comparative negligence.  In Texas, if you sue somebody for wrongful death or personal injuries, whether it is from a car accident or other type of accident, the defendant may attempt to show that the accident was entirely the fault of the plaintiff, or that the plaintiff is comparatively negligent in causing the accident.

For example, let’s assume that you are in a car accident where you were rear-ended. The defendant might claim that you suddenly changed lanes and then slammed on your brakes in order to make a turn at the next intersection.  If the jury believes the defendant’s version of the accident, then the jury might conclude that the accident was completely the plaintiff’s fault.  Alternatively, the jury may also conclude that the accident was both the plaintiff’s and defendant’s fault.  The jury would then assign a percentage of fault to each party.  This is called comparative negligence.  The net effect of comparative negligence is that any damages that are awarded to the plaintiff will be reduced by the plaintiff’s percentage of negligence.  So if the jury awards the plaintiff $10,000 in damages, but finds the plaintiff 10% negligent, then the judge will reduce the damages award by 10% (or $1,000).  Under Texas law, however, if the plaintiff is found to be more than 50% negligent, then the plaintiff recovers nothing.

In the question above, the adjuster is playing “devil’s advocate” for a jury by concluding that the claimant is 10% negligent in causing the accident.  Likewise, any evaluation the adjuster makes will be reduced by 10%.    As a practical matter, however, 10% percent is not a whole lot when talking about settling an insurance claim.  If your car accident claim is worth $10,000, then $1,000 (10%) really doesn’t make that much of a difference in whether you settles or not.  In my career, I rarely see cases go unsettled because of a 10% difference.  Most of the time, the parties are able to meet somewhere in the middle and settle the claim.  Unfortunately, this is a very common tactic for insurance adjusters to frustrate unrepresented claimants.  Had the adjuster not mentioned anything about the 10% reduction and just offered the $9,000, the parties may have been able to get the case settled.  My advice is to not let this tactic effect your common sense.  Always keep your eye on the bottom line and don’t worry about semantics.

It is not difficult to appreciate the inherent dangers in operating a motorcycle as opposed to a car. The Texas Department of Transportation recently reported that more than 400 motorcyclists (including passengers) were killed in accidents. The report also states that nearly 56 percent of those fatalities involved either motorcycle drivers or passengers who were not wearing helmets.
Because motorcyclists lack far more protection than a car would offer, the death rate and rate of serious injuries are much higher. But there is a more practical difficulty that lawyers might face when representing an injured motorcyclist. That is, jurors tend to see motorcyclist as “risk-takers” and may inadvertently hold the operator of a motorcycle to a higher standard of care than the driver of a passenger car. Therefore, your lawyer should be prepared for this misconception and be ready to battle against it.

In Texas, drunk and intoxicated driving makes up about 40% of all accident related deaths. That is a “sobering” fact. This statistic not only includes persons operating cars and other motor vehicles, but also includes pedestrians and bicyclists who were under the influence. Under Texas law, a person in considered “intoxicated” when their blood alcohol level reaches .08 or higher. If the driver involved in an accident is suspected of being drunk, the police officer will note that fact in the accident report. Additionally, the suspected drunk driver will be asked to submit to a breathalyzer or otherwise give a blood specimen for testing. If the driver is rendered incapacitated at the accident scene, many times the hospital or emergency room personnel will administer a complete toxicology testing. The toxicology report will provide not only the driver’s blood alcohol levels, but will also detect the existence of any other drugs or substances such as marijuana, cocaine, and methamphetamines.

Even if the driver of a motor vehicle consumed alcohol but is not legally intoxicated, the police officer may still note whether or not the driver was “under the influence” of alcohol. Being “under the influence” means that, although your blood alcohol level is less than .08, your ability to operate a motor vehicle is still impaired due to the consumption of alcohol. If the officer believes that a driver was under the influence of alcohol, the officer will note that as a factor contributing to the accident.

Naturally, an accident involving a drunk driver puts a personal injury case in a whole new light. If you were the victim of a drunk driver, then you may be able to demand a greater settlement amount just because jurors are generally willing to make higher awards than if the driver was not intoxicated. Insurance companies know this. As such, you can also count on the insurance companies defending these cases more vigorously in hopes of compelling you to take a settlement rather than going to trial. It is this reason that makes it even more important to hire an experienced lawyer to pursue your rights in the event you are the victim of an accident caused by a drunk or intoxicated driver.

If you have been injured in an accident involving a truck or 18 wheeler, a police report is almost always completed. That is because a truck driver is held to a higher standard when operating a truck than a typical operator of a passenger car. In addition to investigating the accident, your lawyer will also investigate the history of the truck driver. That investigation would include a review of the driver’s travel log, sleep records, previous drug testing, prior accidents and traffic citations. Most likely, an accident reconstruction would also be necessary. This information is critical in establishing the liability of the driver and the driver’s employer.

Traffic Accident Statistics

In September 2011, the Texas Department of Transportation released its annual Motor Vehicle Crash Statistics for the calendar year 2010. The information contained in these statistics are obtained from Texas Peace Officer’s Crash Reports.  Likewise, car accident data in which a police report was not made are not included in these statistics.  The Department also breaks down the statistics into various other categories, including fatalities, serious injuries, alcohol related accidents, specific counties and cities.  These statistics also include car accidents, trucking accidents, motorcycle accidents, pedestrian and bicycle accidents, and other types of traffic accidents.

The City of Dallas reported 23,648 total accidents.  Of these, 4,607 serious injuries were reported as a result of these accidents, while 122 fatalities were also reported.  At the same time, Dallas County logged in 35,811 total accidents.  Of these, 7,729 were serious injuries and 168 were fatalities.

The City of Fort Worth reported 9,639 total accidents.  Of these, 1,758 serious injuries were reported as a result of these accidents, while 68 fatalities were also reported.  At the same time, Tarrant County logged in 22,884 total accidents.  Of these, 5,858 involved serious injuries and 134 fatalities were reported.