The new law will apply to any personal injury or death lawsuit filed after August 31, 2021, involving a commercial vehicle—which means any vehicle carrying passengers or goods or that is used to provide services—unless at the time of the accident the vehicle was being used for personal purposes. As such, it applies to lawsuits involving 18-wheelers; ride-share services and taxis; pest control, pool servicing, and lawn mowing businesses; vehicles operated by florists, plumbers, electricians; and literally hundreds of other kinds of vehicles being operated in Texas. 

The heart of the new law is a provision allowing commercial vehicle owners to ask for a two-part trial. In the first part of the trial (Phase 1), the evidence is limited to that showing how the collision happened and severity of the plaintiff’s injuries if the commercial vehicle was at fault. The plaintiff cannot present evidence about how other drivers working for the company defendant acted in other collisions. The plaintiff cannot present evidence about the company’s safety record in unrelated incidents. In Phase 1, the evidence is limited to the events related to the specific collision that is the subject of the lawsuit and the plaintiff’s injuries, if any. 

The new law also provides that photographs and videos showing the collision and the damage caused in the collision must be provided to the jury. Up to now, photos and videos were routinely excluded when they refuted the plaintiff’s claim that the commercial vehicle was at fault or refuted the plaintiff’s claim of hundreds of thousands of dollars of medical expenses resulting from the accident. The plaintiff lawyers know that a jury is highly unlikely to award millions of dollars to a plaintiff when the plaintiff’s car has only a scratch or the video shows the plaintiff caused the accident! 

The second half of the trial (Phase 2) is the part that can be used to present evidence that the defendant acted so recklessly that the defendant may deserve to be punished through the award of punitive damages. The standard for awarding punitive damages is high in Texas, so many defendants should be able to avoid Phase 2 of the trial because the plaintiff simply will not have enough evidence to warrant going through Phase 2. If the trial judge allows the allows the plaintiff to proceed to Phase 2, the plaintiff may be allowed to present evidence about the company’s safety record and employment practices that are not related to the specific collision that is the subject of the lawsuit. 

Up to now, the plaintiff lawyers have wanted to “try the company, not the collision.” They think if they can convince the jury that the company is a danger to the motoring public, then it does not matter that the plaintiff is the person who caused the accident. They think if they can convince the jury the company is reckless, then the jury will award mountains of money for mental anguish and pain and suffering. They desperately want to talk about safety records and other employees, not the fact that their client walked away unhurt from a “fender bender,” or caused the collision. 

The reason to divide the trial into two parts is clear—it prevents the plaintiff lawyer from using the trial to paint the company as rogue and dangerous before first establishing the defendant’s fault. Then, in those few cases when it is warranted, the plaintiffs can present their additional evidence in Phase 2 of the trial. We need your help with the following:

• For those who practice this area of law (or have attorneys who do), please let us know if you have seen an uptick in cases leading up to September 1. We would like to develop data and anecdotes regarding trial lawyer activities prior to the bill taking effect (i.e. was there a massive rush to file cases before 9/1, was there a significant drop in cases after 9/1, etc.).
• For those involved in litigation filed after September 1, please let us know of any new trends or trial practices you are seeing in the courtroom. We would like to understand if the plaintiff’s bar has developed any strategies to circumvent HB 19, and more broadly, how the bill is impacting the disposition of these cases. This helps us determine if we need to take further action in future legislative sessions to address issues that arise after the bill takes effect. 

The effect of House Bill 19 may not be fully appreciated for a couple of years. It is important for defendants and insurers to advocate strongly and persistently for a proper application of the new law in cases filed after August 31, 2021. Then take cases up on appeal when trial courts refuse to properly apply the law. With strong and persistent advocacy by commercial vehicle owners House Bill 19 should relieve some of the pressure commercial vehicle owners are feeling from abusive lawsuits.

Thank you again for all you’ve done to shut down this lawsuit abuse in Texas. Your input was invaluable to getting the bill passed and will continue to be critical now that HB 19 is law.