How To Prove A Texas Gross Negligence Claim
In Texas, a claim of Gross Negligence is defined as:
Gross Negligence occurs when there is an extreme deviation from the ordinary standard of care supporting a finding of wanton, willful and reckless disregard or conscious indifference for the rights and safety of others.
It simply means:
Purposeful behavior done without considering the harm that it could cause other parties.
There are 5 elements of the claim:
- Element 1. The defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff. The defendant had a responsibility to act carefully and protect the plaintiff from harm, meaning they were expected to behave in a way that a reasonable person would in similar circumstances.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The defendant was responsible for maintaining the safety of the premises where the incident occurred.
* The defendant had a contractual obligation to ensure the well-being of all guests on the property.
* The defendant was aware of previous incidents that posed a risk to the plaintiff’s safety.
* The defendant employed staff trained to manage safety protocols and prevent harm to patrons.
* The defendant had a legal duty to adhere to industry safety standards applicable to their business. - Element 2. The defendant breached the duty. The defendant failed to act with the care that a reasonable person would have shown in a similar situation, putting others at risk and causing harm.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The defendant failed to follow established safety protocols, which directly led to the incident in question.
* The defendant ignored multiple warnings from employees about unsafe conditions in the workplace.
* The defendant was aware of the hazardous situation but chose not to take any corrective action.
* The defendant’s actions demonstrated a reckless disregard for the safety of others involved.
* The defendant had a history of similar breaches that resulted in prior incidents, indicating a pattern of gross negligence. - Element 3. The breach (act or omission) involved an extreme degree of risk, considering the probability and magnitude of the potential harm to others. The breach refers to a situation where someone’s actions or lack of action posed a very high risk of serious harm to others, taking into account how likely that harm was to happen and how severe it could be.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The defendant operated heavy machinery without proper safety measures in place, significantly increasing the likelihood of serious injury to nearby workers.
* The defendant ignored multiple warnings about hazardous conditions, demonstrating a blatant disregard for the safety of others in the vicinity.
* The defendant was aware of a history of accidents in the area but failed to implement necessary precautions, exposing others to extreme danger.
* The defendant’s actions directly led to a near-miss incident, highlighting the high probability of severe harm if the behavior continued.
* The defendant’s decision to forgo essential training for employees resulted in a situation where the risk of catastrophic failure was unacceptably high. - Element 4. The defendant had actual and subjective awareness of the risk involved but proceeded in conscious indifference to the rights, safety, or welfare of others. The defendant knew there was a real danger but chose to ignore it, showing a careless disregard for the safety and well-being of others.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The defendant was informed multiple times about the hazardous conditions at the site but chose to ignore the warnings.
* Despite knowing that safety protocols were not being followed, the defendant continued operations without implementing necessary changes.
* The defendant had previously experienced similar incidents but failed to take corrective action to prevent future occurrences.
* Witnesses reported that the defendant dismissed concerns raised by employees regarding safety risks, indicating a disregard for their welfare.
* The defendant was aware of the potential consequences of their actions yet proceeded without taking any precautions to mitigate the risks. - Element 5. The defendant’s breach was the proximate cause of damage to the plaintiff. The defendant’s careless actions directly led to the harm suffered by the plaintiff, meaning that the damage was a foreseeable result of the defendant’s negligence.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The defendant failed to maintain the safety equipment, which directly led to the accident occurring.
* Witnesses reported that the defendant ignored safety protocols, resulting in hazardous conditions.
* The plaintiff suffered injuries that were directly linked to the defendant’s negligent actions during the incident.
* Medical records indicate that the plaintiff’s injuries would not have occurred but for the defendant’s breach of duty.
* The timeline of events shows that the defendant’s actions preceded the plaintiff’s damages, establishing a clear causal link.
(See Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Section 41.001(11). Mobil Oil Corp. v. Ellender, 968 SW 2d 917 – Tex: Supreme Court 1998. Transportation Ins. Co. v. Moriel, 879 SW 2d 10 – Tex: Supreme Court 1994. Lee Lewis Const., Inc. v. Harrison, 70 SW 3d 778 – Tex: Supreme Court 2001.)
If you’re in court without a lawyer and plan to assert a claim of Gross Negligence, having a Personal Practice of Law at Courtroom5 is essential. You’ll need to make critical decisions about what to file at each phase of your case and prepare legal documents that are supported by thorough legal research and a strong analysis of the facts. Equip yourself with the tools and knowledge necessary to effectively navigate your case.
Prove Your TX Gross Negligence Claim
U.S. Civil Cases Only