Texas Car Accident Law

Most people think they know how car accident cases work: You get hit by someone, call your insurance provider, and they take care of the rest. If you’re in a minor accident that’s more or less correct most of the time, so those who had a simple fender-bender and went looking for information about what’s next can stop reading now.

Serious car accidents, however, are a different matter. What do I mean by a “serious” car accident? Well, as you might guess, many collisions result in catastrophic, life-changing injuries—or, in worst cases, the loss of one or more loved ones. Cases that begin with those severe damages work differently, and in this guide we’re going to explain how serious personal injury and wrongful death car accident cases work.

Chapter 1: What Is a Car Accident Case, Really?

Everyone either knows or can quickly figure out what a car accident is, but how do car accident lawsuits work? Well, car accident cases are usually negligence cases, in which an injured person sues whoever they believe caused their injuries through careless action or inaction.

Before we discuss what you must prove to win a case, let’s clear the air about one very important thing that trips up many car accident victims: Since you’re the one bringing the claim, alleging someone else is to blame for your injuries, the law places the burden squarely on you to make your case. Things only get tougher from there, in that no one—not court officials, not insurance representatives—will walk you through everything you need to know. Those who want to make use of Texas courts are expected to know the law, rules of evidence, courtroom procedure, and a whole host of other minutiae that the average person doesn’t know the first thing about.

Without that out of the way, let’s discuss the nuts and bolts of what a car accident case is, legally speaking. Texas law has long held that an injured person wins their negligence case when they can successfully prove the following:

1. The alleged wrongdoer had a duty not to harm them;
2. The wrongdoer breached that duty by causing injury or death;
3. The victim suffered damages because of the wrongdoer’s breach of duty; and
4. The wrongdoer’s actions were the proximate cause (read: most direct cause) of the injuries.

So when we talk about a “car accident case,” what we really mean is that you sue someone for an act of negligence committed behind the wheel of a vehicle. Perhaps more importantly from your perspective, in order to win a a car accident case in Texas, the burden is on you to prove the listed elements above. That may sound simple, but as we touched on above, there are many hurdles between you and successfully winning a case.

That may sound pretty convoluted if you have only a passing familiarity with the law. To help you better understand why the courts handle car accidents the way they do, in the next chapter we’ll discuss how the system for resolving car accident cases through lawsuits came to be in the first place.

Chapter 2: Where Does Texas Car Accident Law Come From? 

What one might call “car accident law” is actually a collection of statutes and precedent set by previous court decisions, which lawyers use to help their clients prove the negligence elements outlined above. There’s actually no single book or set of laws that one can look to to understand the laws governing car accidents.

Think about it: Texas has rules of court procedure, evidence rules, transportation laws, insurance laws, and many other bodies of law that don’t exclusively apply to car wrecks. When a lawyer represents a client in a Texas car accident case, they visit that Texas “law buffet” where they add a scoop of one law and a slice of another. Soon their plate is piled high with useful statutes and precedents, all of which they use to build their client’s case.

Each and every step of the way a court, legislature, or administrative body has to balance many considerations. For example, the system must allow those who’ve been wronged to have an avenue to recover their losses, while at the same time giving the accused their day in court. Legislative and regulatory bodies may also add their two cents by proposing statutes to enhance road safety. That’s part of why a serious car accident case is so complex: All these groups just have to weigh in, while the courts come up with ways to mash the various rules together in a way that’s fair to victims and the accused.

The simplest way to think of it is that “car accident law” is really a collected bunch of rules (that may seem unrelated) a lawyer combines to guide his client toward fair compensation. In the next section we’ll look at several such rules.

Chapter 3: Some Important Texas Laws Used in Car Wreck Cases

As we explained, there’s not a single definitive list of “car accident law” rules written out by the officials down in Austin. Instead, Texas car accident lawyers borrow from multiple bodies of Texas law and apply them to car accident litigation. The following are some particular laws and court decisions referenced by attorneys during their own cases.

The Law: Metzger v. Gambill, 37 S.W.2d 1077 (Tex. Civ. App. 1931), Rudes v. Gottschalk, 159 Tex. 552, 324 S.W.2d 201 (1959)

What they say: Put simply, these cases established that car accident cases are really negligence cases.

Why that matters: Defining these accidents as matters of negligence, as well as providing some context for proving negligence, paved the way for countless future crash victims to hold the people who hurt them liable.

Example: Alvin is traveling down a highway at 70 mph, while Simon is going the other way at 65 mph. Alvin is fiddling with his radio settings instead of watching the road when he crosses over the highway’s center line. His pickup then crashes into Simon’s car and causes serious injuries to Simon.

Texas has no laws on the books that specifically forbid messing with a radio while a vehicle is in motion, but it’s understood to be a dangerous act that a reasonably prudent person wouldn’t engage in. Rather than require Texas legislature to pass laws focused only on radio adjustments, instead that and many other forms of distracted driving are all treated as matters of general negligence thanks to the precedents set by Metzger and Rudes.

The Law: Texas Transportation Code § 601.051

What it says: “A person may not operate a motor vehicle in this state unless financial responsibility is established for that vehicle.” In other words, all Texas drivers must be insured.

Why it’s important: This ensures that law-abiding Texas citizens can provide at least some help to anyone they hurt in an accident. Without it, many injured crash victims might find themselves with no help whatsoever as they try to get back on their feet.

Example: A jury finds Peter at fault for a car accident that injures Ray. If Texas didn’t require Peter to carry insurance, it’s possible that Ray would never see anything like enough money to make him whole again. If Peter didn’t have savings, significant assets, or even a job, Ray would be more or less out of luck.

Since the law requires a motorist to carry $30,000 minimum in per-person injury liability insurance, $60,000 minimum in per-event injury liability insurance, and $25,000 in property damage liability insurance, there will be at least some money to compensate Ray for his injuries should he prevail in court.

The Law: G. A. Stowers Furniture Co. v. American Indemnity Co., 15 S.W.2d 544 (Tex. Civ. App. 1929)

What it says: This case decision from an older version of the Texas Supreme Court was the source of Stowers Doctrine, which requires insurance companies to settle reasonable offers within policy limits when the policyholder might face an excess judgment in court.

Why it’s important: In many accidents the victim’s losses are far greater than the available insurance money to compensate them. When an insurance company is in a position to end the case within their client’s policy limits, Stowers prevents them from playing “hardball” under the assumption they’re only on the hook for the policy limits even if they lose.

Without Stowers, insurance companies would almost never accept a settlement agreement out of court. The worst that could happen is they gamble and lose, and any judgment beyond policy limits would be the policyholder’s problem. Stowers short-circuits that by saying if an insurer takes over their policyholder’s defense then they must represent the policyholder (their client) to the best of their ability. That includes negotiating and potentially accepting an offer within the policy limits to prevent a much larger judgment down the line.

Example:  If evidence shows that Albert caused a car accident which injured Peggy, Peggy may first attempt to resolve the matter with Albert’s insurance carrier. Peggy’s attorney submits a Stowers demand to the company and offers to settle for Albert’s policy limit, even though a jury might award substantially more if the matter went to court.

The insurance company rejects the attorney’s settlement proposal, but at trial a jury finds in Peggy’s favor and awards her damages substantially greater than Albert’s insurance policy limit. Since the insurance company could have prevented the lawsuit and a large jury award by just settling on Albert’s behalf, it’s responsible for compensating Peggy above and beyond the limits of Albert’s policy.

The Law: Texas Farmers Ins. Co. v. Soriano, 881 S.W.2d 312 (Tex. 1994)

What it says: In Soriano, some plaintiffs argued that an insurance company which paid a victim within its policyholder’s limits diminished policy money available to other victims. They argued that because they got less money the insurance company acted in bad faith, and therefore owed them money above and beyond the policy limits.

The Texas Supreme Court ruled that the insurance company’s duty under Stowers is to settle a case within policy limits for a reasonable amount of money. If they do that, the court ruled it doesn’t matter if another group of victims won’t have as much money to compensate them. After all, the company is just doing its job by settling.

We conclude that when faced with a settlement demand arising out of multiple claims and inadequate proceeds, an insurer may enter into a reasonable settlement with one of the several claimants even though such settlement exhausts or diminishes the proceeds available to satisfy other claims.

Texas Farmers Ins. Co. v. Soriano, 881 S.W.2d 312 (Tex. 1994)

To sum all that up: “First come, first served.”

Why it’s important: Greater divisions of an insurance policy’s limited resources could take badly-needed resources away from the person who suffered the most—usually the first person hit. Provided they act swiftly, that victim’s attorney can cite Soriano as justification for why their client’s compensation should exceed that of the other claimants. Moreover, the provisions of Soriano give great incentive to act quickly after an accident with multiple victims and/or claimants.

Example: Delia’s large pickup truck fails to slow down for highway traffic ahead and slams into the back of Charles’ hatchback. Charles’ vehicle then rear-ends Jackie’s SUV, pushing it into the back of Lydia’s car. Charles ends up with serious back injuries, while Jackie suffers a possible concussion. Lydia, the last person hit, has bruises and scrapes.

Every injured driver and passenger in the chain-reaction wreck might have a claim against Delia for triggering it, and between them the costs of their injuries may be greater than the limits of Delia’s insurance policy. If her policy can’t cover the full extent of everyone’s damages, how would the insurance company divide it? According to the Soriano court ruling, the insurer may fully settle with Charles even though others have claims as well.

The Law: 4Front Engineered Solutions, Inc. v. Rosales, 505 S.W.3d 905, 909 (Tex.2016) 

What it says: This case outlines the elements of negligent entrustment, in which the owner of a vehicle may be considered liable for any injuries caused by another person they allowed to operate it.

In order to show that negligent entrustment occurred, an injured person or their attorney must prove the following elements:

1. The vehicle was entrusted to a third party by its owner or custodian;
2. The third party was unlicensed, incompetent, or reckless;
3. The vehicle’s owner or custodian knew or should have known the borrower was unlicensed, incompetent, or reckless;
4. The borrower was negligent during the lawsuit’s causal accident; and
5. The borrower’s negligence was the proximate cause of the accident and the victim’s injuries.

Why it’s important: Speaking frankly, someone who knowingly lets an irresponsible or reckless person borrow their equipment or vehicle may well deserve a share of responsibility for any harm the borrower causes at the wheel. It also means that the victim may have more than one person to sue in pursuit of maximum damages for their injury. That can be especially important if the person who hit them was un- or underinsured.

Example: Roger lets Steve borrow his pickup truck so Steve can move some furniture across town. Steve has a couple of DUI’s and some other traffic citations under his belt, and his license was suspended. However, he promises to behave while borrowing the truck so Roger agrees to loan it to him for the move.

Unsurprisingly, Steve lied. He blows through a red light and causes a serious wreck. The other driver suffers major injuries and sues Steve, and the victim’s lawyer argues that Roger negligently entrusted the pickup to a known dangerous driver. A jury agrees that Roger should have known better than to loan his truck to Steve, and Roger is held partially liable for the victim’s damages.

The Law: Texas Constitution, Article 16 § 50

What it says: A person or family’s home is exempt from seizure for the purposes of satisfying a judgment against them.

Why it’s important:  The roof over someone’s head usually can’t be forcibly taken from them, even if they can’t afford the full amount of the compensation they owe to an accident victim.

Example: Travis gets distracted while driving, crosses left of center on a two-way road, and causes a serious head-on crash with Antonio. Antonio is severely injured in the wreck and sues Travis; the jury ultimately decides that Travis must pay $1,000,000 in damages.

Travis’ insurance only covers a portion of that judgment, so to make up as much of the rest as possible some of his assets might be seized. However, his house is protected from that seizure by the Texas Constitution.

The Law: Texas Property Code § 42.001–42.002 

What it says: Certain assets other than one’s home may also be partially or wholly immune from seizure by creditors. Among those assets are:

• Furniture and family heirlooms;
• Clothes and some jewelry;
• Farming and ranching equipment;
• Other professional equipment or transportation;
• Pets and livestock; and
• One vehicle per family member or single adult who either a) has a driver’s license or b) relies on a licensed party for transportation.

That’s not the entire list, and some conditions (such as the overall dollar value of the assets) apply in the event of possible seizure, but the bottom line is that someone who loses a personal injury or wrongful death case likely won’t lose every last thing they own to settle the damages. Texas asset protection laws are some of the strongest in the country.

Why it’s important: Those who negligently or wrongfully cause an accident should pay as much as possible for the damage they cause, but the law won’t take the clothes off their back to satisfy a settlement.

Example: Consider the previous example in which Travis caused serious injuries to Antonio in a head-on crash. Travis’ home was protected from seizure per the Texas Constitution, but the Texas Property Code prevented many of his possessions from being taken as well even though some of the $1,000,000 in damages remained unfulfilled. Among other things his dog, clothes, and car were exempt from seizure because their total value fell below the threshold established in the Texas Property Code.

The Law: Montes v. Pendergrass, 61 S.W.3d 505 (Tex. App. San Antonio 2001)

What it says: Motorists have a duty to keep an eye out for changing conditions on the road.

The failure to keep a proper lookout can be a proximate cause of an accident where the motorist should have seen something in time to have avoided the accident by evasive action and but for such failure the collision could have been avoided.

Montes v. Pendergrass, 61 S.W.3d 505, 510 (Tex. App. 2001)

Put simply, pay attention while driving or the crash you get in may be your fault in the eyes of the law.

Why it’s important: Everyone has a duty to drive in ways that minimize the risk posed to everyone else. That means obeying traffic laws, keeping their vehicle in good operating condition, and watching traffic around them for any potential issues. If they fail to do that and get in a wreck, their lack of observation may be the proximate cause of the accident.

Example: Freddy is driving on the highway in the right lane when he approaches a construction zone where the left lane must merge. David is in the left lane and starts to merge right when cones start to close the road ahead. Freddy saw the cones from up the road but didn’t check to his left or look at his mirrors, thus missing David’s car merging into the lane. David crashes into Freddy, which makes David’s car overturn and roll. David is critically injured in the rollover, and sues Freddy for negligence.

In court a jury finds that David could have chosen a safer moment to enter the lane, but Freddy could and should have seen David’s merge attempt. The jury decides that Freddy’s failure to slow or stop, signifying a failure to keep proper lookout, is the proximate cause of the crash and David’s injuries.

Car Accident Law Comes from Many Places

The above are just a few of the laws a Texas car accident attorney might use while building an injury case for their client. Some laws come from state legislature, others come from the Texas Constitution, and many are found in case law where judges’ rulings serve as legal precedent for future cases.

This matters for you, the victim, because there isn’t a single place you can go to find an answer about how to litigate a car accident case (we didn’t even touch on rules of evidence or the necessary steps to get it admitted before a court). Even most attorneys spend their whole careers learning and honing their craft, and without that experience and commitment it’s exceptionally difficult to win damages in court. In all our years of practice, we have never seen an accident victim represent themselves at trial and prevail.

Chapter 4: What Compensation Is Available in a Car Accident Case?

To get a court to hear a case, you have to build that case in a way the court recognizes. We mentioned earlier an example in which one person hurt another while adjusting his radio; the victim of that accident couldn’t just walk into a court, hand the judge a piece of paper saying “He hurt me because he was changing radio stations,” and expect positive results. Instead, he must argue his position using a framework recognized by the court, i.e. a negligence argument.

Asking the court for compensation has similar rules. It’s not enough to show up with a stack of bills and estimated costs, then demand the defendant pay them all back. Rather, a plaintiff must frame them in categories of losses the court understands. Those categories are called damages. Some damages are simple to put a monetary value on, like medical bills, property damage, lost wages, and other expenses that can be calculated with fair accuracy. Other less-tangible losses like pain and suffering, emotional distress caused by the crash, and reduced quality of life in its aftermath may also be taken into consideration by a jury when determining the value of a claim.

While each case is unique and damages vary considerably, a simple back-of-the-envelope calculation for how much your case is worth would be to add together your total medical costs and lost earnings, then tack on a small percentage of that amount for pain and suffering. That will give you a rough idea what your case should be worth, assuming the other party is 100% at fault for your losses.

To summarize, damages account for the overall impact of an injury on a victim’s well-being and attempt to compensate for their losses, both enumerable and inestimable. Before damages can be calculated or awarded, however, the victim must prove that the defendant’s negligence was the proximate cause of the injury.

Chapter 5: Insurance Explained

People may not often stop and consider why insurance exists, and those who do may misunderstand its real purpose. They think insurance is there to ensure accident victims recover from their losses, but that’s actually putting the cart before the horse a bit.

In reality, insurance is mostly a risk buffer. When a person buys car insurance, for example, they’re effectively buying a financial shield in case they cause a crash. The deal they strike with their insurer goes something like this: “I’ll pay you a small amount of money every so often, and in exchange you’ll step in and protect me if I screw up and cause a large amount of damage.” That’s all well and good for the company and their new client, but who’s missing from that deal? The accident victim.

The biggest mistake most people make in a serious car accident case is assuming the insurance company and the policy money are there specifically to help them. The reality is that the company is simply bound by their contract to look after the interests of the driver who hit you and defend him if necessary. Those efforts to protect their policyholder may create major challenges for accident victims—here’s a few of the biggest ones:

• As we’ve already mentioned, the insurance company in question works for the “other guy” involved in your accident. A claims adjuster may be friendly on the phone, sure, but at the end of the day their legal obligation is to help someone who isn’t you.
• No matter what police may conclude about an accident, their crash report doesn’t force an insurance company to do anything. The company can (and probably will) dispute police findings and send out their own investigators to put together a different story—one that is far more sympathetic to their client.
• The insurance company doesn’t have to tell you how large the other driver’s insurance policy is. Without knowing the coverage limits of the at-fault party’s policy, you may find it difficult to say whether it’s enough for medical expenses, property damage, and other losses.
  The lack of disclosure could also complicate settlement negotiations, as it’s hard to reach a fair settlement amount if you don’t know the maximum coverage available. Insurance companies might even take advantage of the unknown policy limit during negotiations, offering settlements far lower than what might be justified. This can result in uninformed claimants accepting less compensation than they’re entitled to.
• Some laws govern insurance company behavior, but they still give those firms plenty of leeway to do things not in the victim’s favor. Insurance agents may not be permitted to outright lie or commit fraud, but they still have plenty of room within the rules to help you undermine your own case.
  Take for example an insurer’s requests for recorded statements and records: Pitched as a way to better evaluate and resolve your claim, from the company’s perspective it’s really to get a peek at your evidence without having to go through your lawyer.
  A recorded statement usually consists of an insurance company adjuster asking you questions prepared by a defense attorney—questions subtly designed to undermine your claim. For instance, the adjuster might ask you what you think your case is worth. This is more often than not a trap, as whatever estimate you give them could be used against you. Aim too high and the company will use that to paint you as greedy to a jury, while too low an estimate will lead to questions about why they should pay you more than you yourself think you deserve. That’s why we protect our clients’ interests at trial by helping them answer questions in ways that don’t take an adjuster’s bait.
• The last challenge is the biggest: No matter how clear the facts may seem, or how certain you are that you’re right, you can’t make the insurance company honor its policy. The only outside force that can compel the insurance company to accept responsibility for a crash is a jury.

Chapter 6: Putting it All Together

The challenges listed above may sound like there’s tough sledding ahead for anyone in the unlucky situation of dealing with insurance, but as much as those companies may bend the rules they don’t actually write them. Even though their involvement creates some difficulties to overcome, it also makes opportunities such as:

• More funds for recovery – Most drivers who cause accidents don’t have a lot of surplus money just sitting around in the bank to pay for their mistakes. In fact, that’s usually why people get insurance: For a relatively small fee, they transfer the obligation to help someone they hurt over to the insurance company. The company’s involvement and financial backing generally means an accident victim is better able to recover at least a portion of their losses.
• Attorney oversight and help – Insurers would love nothing more than to keep lawyers out of the mix, since many of their tricks and tactics rely on catching you unprepared. Having an attorney on your side to guide you through the process can help ensure the insurance company plays by the rules and negotiates in good faith.
• Transparency – An experienced attorney will use the power of the courts to compel an insurance company to disclose the full amount of insurance available. Texas law requires motorists to have at least $30,000 of coverage for injuries per person, up to a total of $60,000 per accident, and $25,000 of coverage for property damage, but many people choose policies that cover far more than the mandatory minimum. When every dollar counts toward making an accident victim whole, it’s important to track down any available funds that might help.
• Identifying all liable parties – Sometimes the other driver isn’t really the only one responsible for an accident. People don’t always realize how many wrecks are actually caused by manufacturing defects in vehicles, for example, but insurance companies rarely bother to put in the time or effort needed to identify those. An attorney working on the victim’s behalf is far more likely to investigate whether a defect or malfunction played a part, and if so whether a manufacturer should also be held accountable for the resulting damage.
• Stowers demand – As we mentioned in Chapter 3, a Stowers demand made by an attorney may help resolve an insurance claim more quickly. It motivates insurers to negotiate in good faith, since they assume risk beyond the policy limits if they refuse to serve their client’s best interests by settling within the policy limits.

Now that we’ve defined a car accident, looked at some laws attorneys might refer to during litigation, discussed potential compensation for the victim, examined the pitfalls of insurance, and outlined the benefits of attorney representation, let’s see how it all works together in a narrative example:

On a sunny Texas afternoon, Thomas and Milton were driving through a busy intersection when they got into a car accident. The collision occurred when Milton, momentarily distracted by his phone, ran a red light and collided with Thomas’ vehicle. Thomas suffered serious injuries in the crash, and his car sustained heavy damage.

Both men reported the accident to their insurance companies. Milton’s insurance provider investigated the wreck and determined that Milton was at fault. As a result, Milton’s insurer agreed to cover the costs associated with Thomas’ injuries and vehicle repair. However, things got trickier from there: The company agreed to cover Thomas’ medical and repair bills, but Milton’s policy limits didn’t fully compensate Thomas for his damages. To make up the difference, Thomas decided to file a personal injury lawsuit against Milton.

To increase his chance of winning the lawsuit, Thomas hired an experienced car accident attorney. The attorney gathered evidence, interviewed witnesses, consulted experts, and negotiated with Milton’s legal representation and insurance company. The attorney also filed a Stowers demand, requesting that the insurer settle for Milton’s maximum policy limits. Negotiations fell through, however, and since the matter couldn’t be settled out of court, the case proceeded.

The lawsuit claimed that Milton’s negligent behavior caused Thomas physical injuries, pain and suffering, lost wages due to time off work, and other damages. Thomas’ attorney argued that he deserved adequate compensation for the expense and trauma he endured after the crash. The insurance company attorneys argued that the accident was not really Milton’s fault, but even if Milton was partly to blame that Thomas’ injuries were less serious than he claimed.

During the trial, a jury heard the evidence and arguments from both sides. After careful consideration, the jury found in favor of Thomas, acknowledging that Milton’s negligence was the proximate cause of the accident and damages. Thomas was awarded a substantial settlement that included compensation for his medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and other damages. The award exceeded the limits of Milton’s insurance policy, but since his insurer refused a Stowers demand it is required to provide the whole amount of the award to Thomas. Without the Stowers demand, Milton might have had to pay the remaining amount from his own assets.

That’s a pretty straightforward look at how a car accident case might unfold, from start to finish. However, every case is unique and few are that simple when all is said and done. People involved in these accidents certainly know that, and when they call us afterward they often have a number of important questions they need answers to. We address a few of the most common ones in the next section.

Chapter 7: Frequently Asked Questions

What Is My Car Accident Lawsuit Worth?

Most people would agree that someone who negligently caused injuries or death should answer for that, and a lawsuit is designed to measure what they owe the victim in dollars and cents. However, the specific amount to be paid depends on several factors, including:

• Severity of injuries – A settlement’s valuation may largely be defined by the type and scope of injuries the victim suffered. If they had damage that cost millions in surgeries and impaired the quality of their remaining life, they might be awarded tens of millions of dollars by a jury. If they instead suffered cuts, scrapes, and a few broken bones, but were expected to fully recover in time, the same jury might award them a smaller sum.
• Where the accident happened – The attitudes and opinions of local jurors can vary widely from place to place—even between ZIP codes in the same general region. For example, certain parts of Texas often see juries award far less in damages than they would for similar accidents elsewhere.
• Nature of the defendant – Not all defendants are created equal, and the nature of the alleged at-fault party could make a difference in a jury award. If the crash was caused by someone in a 20-year-old clunker held together by duct tape and prayer, that person may not have more than minimum liability coverage to pay a settlement. However, if the defendant was driving a Maserati to the yacht club when they crashed into the victim, they may have a larger insurance policy and/or other significant assets they can use to satisfy a jury award.

That’s just a handful of the many considerations involved in a car accident case, which is why a careful and thorough investigation must be conducted and the whole truth learned.

Is There a Time Limit to File a Lawsuit?

The short answer: Yes.

The slightly longer answer: Under Texas law, adult accident victims have two years to file a lawsuit against the party that injured them. This deadline, called the statute of limitations, starts when an accident occurs or when a victim discovers an injury—whichever is later.

With only a few exceptions, the statute of limitations is quite strictly enforced. If you miss the deadline to file a lawsuit with the court, you will be barred from seeking any compensation. Two years may sound like a long time, but it disappears much faster than you might think. That’s why it’s important to take swift action if you are hurt or lose a loved one in a car accident.

How Long Does it Take to Litigate a Car Accident Case?

Unsurprisingly, it varies. A car accident case can take weeks, months, or even years to settle depending on the complexity of the case and the severity of your injuries. A simple fender-bender with minimal damage and clear fault might be resolved with relative ease, while a major collision with multiple contributing factors and serious or fatal injuries could take much longer. Every case is different, and a given case’s outcome can’t be easily predicted in advance. That’s why it’s always best to have an attorney who recognizes all the variables and how to address them properly.

Should I Hire an Attorney?

Some may take this with a grain of salt considering it comes from a law firm, but speaking frankly: Yes. If your accident is more complex than a low-speed collision with only a few bruises to show for it, you will likely need an attorney’s help to make heads or tails of insurance negotiations and/or courtroom procedures. Here’s a few things a good personal injury lawyer will bring to the table:

• Clear grasp of court procedure/language and the rules of evidence;
• Association with and resources to hire the right experts if needed;
• Experience negotiating (and arguing) with insurance companies;
• Ability and practice in persuading a jury; and
• Familiarity with the tools and strategies of defense attorneys.

That’s just a handful of benefits, but there are many more. Think of it like this: Some jobs are best handled by people with formal training. If a pipe bursts under a house, the resident will probably call a plumber. If their car starts smoking or won’t turn on, they’d most likely consult a mechanic. Similarly, matters of law are generally best handled by trained legal professionals.

Should I Talk to Insurance Company Representatives after My Accident?

It often doesn’t take long for insurance companies to reach out accident victims. They may say they “just want to see how you’re doing,” but what they really want is to find ways to minimize what their company might owe you. In some cases they might quickly offer you a lowball settlement to “cut through the red tape and get this over with,” while in others they may interview you and look for material they can use to prove you aren’t hurt as badly as you claim. Even something as harmless as answering “fine” when they ask how you’re holding up could be taken out of context to argue you aren’t hurt that badly.

We talk a little more in-depth about insurance company tactics in regard to trucking accidents here and here, but many of the same concerns apply after a serious car accident. Some communication with them may be unavoidable, which is why it’s often best to have an attorney handle those interactions. Insurers are far less likely to try anything shifty when they’re talking to someone who knows their tactics.

What if I’m Not Sure Who Was at Fault?

Sometimes car accidents involve more than two vehicles, or other external factors also play a part. If you were seriously hurt in a crash but you aren’t entirely sure who’s responsible for your injuries, having someone conduct a thorough investigation on your behalf may be the best course of action.

Hiring an experienced law firm is likely the best option for such an investigation. As your representatives, a firm will gather clear evidence and learn all the available facts. In some cases those facts will suggest your best course of action is to drop the case, while in others the investigation is crucial for proving someone else caused your injuries—and for building a case against them.

How Do I Hire Grossman Law Offices and What Does It Cost?

Hiring Grossman Law Offices is as simple as signing your name to a one-page contract, which we can send using whatever method you feel is best: Mail, email, fax, or even in person if you want to come on down to the office. Once hired, the gears start turning right away as we investigate and build your case.

In terms of cost, Grossman Law requires no money up front. We operate on contingency, meaning the firm only collects a fee if you win your case. If we successfully resolve it without filing suit, the fee is 33% of the collected settlement. If the case goes to court, the fee is 40%. This fee structure aligns our interests with yours, as the better we do on our clients’ behalf the better we do as a firm.

Furthermore, Grossman Law Offices fronts all the costs of your case, such as court fees, expert witness fees, and other costs associated with investigating and litigating your case. If we win the fees are recovered from the winnings, but if we don’t the firm absorbs those costs. No matter what happens, though, you will never owe us a penny from your own pocket.

Where Does Grossman Law Offices Operate?

Our main office is in Dallas, TX, but our attorneys are licensed to handle car accident cases throughout Texas and Arkansas. If you were seriously injured or lost a loved on in a car accident, use the outreach forms on our website or call us at (855) 326-0000 to arrange a free and confidential consultation.