Texas applies modified comparative fault. A claimant may not recover if their percentage of responsibility exceeds 50%; otherwise damages are reduced by the claimant’s share. That is what separates Texas being sued after a car accident from a generic national summary. Read Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 33.001 before the background sections below. The personal-injury deadline is Two years for personal injury actions under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 16.003.. Texas requires minimum auto liability coverage; proportionate responsibility under Chapter 33 governs insurer indemnity and trial outcomes.
Comparative fault and negligence in Texas
Texas applies modified comparative fault. A claimant may not recover if their percentage of responsibility exceeds 50%; otherwise damages are reduced by the claimant’s share.
In Texas, if you are more than 50% at fault (51%+), you recover nothing. At 50% or less, damages are reduced by your share of fault.
Practical consequences:
- Settlement leverage tracks predicted fault shares.
- Insurers often reserve rights or deny coverage based on comparative-fault findings.
- Multiple defendants (other drivers, employers, vehicle owners) can split fault among themselves under Texas allocation rules.
Insurance: at-fault, PIP, and no-fault thresholds
Texas requires minimum auto liability coverage; proportionate responsibility under Chapter 33 governs insurer indemnity and trial outcomes.
First-party benefits (PIP / MedPay) do not always eliminate a tort suit. Where Texas uses a no-fault threshold, confirm whether your injuries meet the statutory trigger before assuming a lawsuit is barred or available.
Deadline to sue (statute of limitations)
Two years for personal injury actions under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 16.003.
Missing the deadline usually ends the claim permanently. Tolling (minority, discovery rules, bankruptcy stays) can apply in narrow situations — do not assume extra time without counsel.
A concrete Texas scenario
Here is one way the Texas pieces fit together. Change any fact and the statute may point somewhere else.
Two drivers collide in Texas. Each claims the other was negligent, and one was partly at fault.
- Identify the fault system: In Texas, if you are more than 50% at fault (51%+), you recover nothing. At 50% or less, damages are reduced by your share of fault..
- Apply what fault does to the claim: Texas applies modified comparative fault. A claimant may not recover if their percentage of responsibility exceeds 50%; otherwise damages are reduced by the claimant’s share.
- Calendar the lawsuit deadline: Two years for personal injury actions under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 16.003..
- Separate insurance coverage from whether a tort claim exists: Texas requires minimum auto liability coverage; proportionate responsibility under Chapter 33 governs insurer indemnity and trial outcomes.
In Texas the accident lawsuit turns on Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 33.001 and the modified 51 rule, not on a national no-fault script.
What to do after a crash in Texas
- Get medical care and document injuries.
- Preserve photos, dash-cam, witness names, and the police report.
- Notify your insurer promptly; avoid recorded statements to the other driver’s insurer without advice.
- Calendar the SOL: Two years for personal injury actions under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 16.003..
- Use LawDiver’s LawDiver rail (scoped to Texas) to research comparative/contributory negligence opinions before negotiating.
Case law: fault and auto accidents in Texas
Carolyn Parker DUNCAN, Individually and as Administratrix, Petitioner, v. CESSNA AIRCRAFT COMPANY, Respondent
…o Duncan should be reduced in accordance with principles of comparative apportionment. Because Cessna also seeks a similar reduction in its liability to Smithson’s estate, we must address two distinct, but closely related questions: (1) whether a plaintiff’s contributory negligence is a defense in strict products liability actions when that negligence does not rise to the level…
On car-accident / fault, Carolyn Parker DUNCAN, Individually and as Administratrix, Petitioner, v. CESSNA AIRCRAFT COMPANY, Respondent speaks to the Texas dispute in this passage: "Duncan should be reduced in accordance with principles of comparative apportionment." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Mrs. Lynn E. BONNIWELL, Et Al., Petitioners, v. BEECH AIRCRAFT CORPORATION, Respondent
…nse to a special issue requesting the jury to determine the comparative negligence of the defendants, the jury apportioned 75% of the fault to Metro's negligence and 25% of the fault to Shawnee's negligence. In conformity with their earlier findings in Beech's favor, the jury apportioned no fault to Beech. Based upon the jury's verdict, the trial court rendered judgment against…
Mrs. Lynn E. BONNIWELL, Et Al., Petitioners, v. BEECH AIRCRAFT CORPORATION, Respondent is worth reading on Texas car-accident / fault because the court put the point in its own words: "Metro's negligence and 25% of the fault to Shawnee's negligence. In conformity with their earlier findings in Beech's favor, the jury apportioned no fault to Beech." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
JCW ELECTRONICS, INC., Petitioner, v. Pearl Iriz GARZA, Individually and on Behalf of the Estat — Jefferson, J
…t issue. This is not our first occasion to consider whether comparative responsibility principles apply to UCC-based implied warranty claims. In Signal Oil & Gas Co. v. Universal Oil Products, 545 S.W.2d 907, 910 (Tex. App.-Beaumont 1977, writ granted), the court of appeals held that, under traditional contributory negligence principles, any negligence on the buyer’s1 part woul…
Practitioners open JCW ELECTRONICS, INC., Petitioner, v. Pearl Iriz GARZA, Individually and on Behalf of the Estat — Jefferson, J when Texas car-accident / fault turns on the distinction in this sentence: "This is not our first occasion to consider whether comparative responsibility principles apply to UCC-based implied warranty claims. In Signal Oil & Gas Co. v. Universal Oil Products, 545 S.W.2d 907, 910 (Tex. App." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
CYPRESS CREEK UTILITY SERVICE COMPANY, INC., Petitioner, v. Mike MULLER Et Al., Respondents
…Baylor University, 126 Tex. 99, 84 S.W.2d 703 (1935), in a comparative negligence suit in which the jury apportioned a percentage of negligence to the settling tortfeasor. The trial court rendered judgment for plaintiffs, allowing no Bradshaw credit. The court of appeals held that the Comparative Negligence Statute, article 2212a 1 § 2(e) abrogates the Bradshaw rule and affirm…
Texas opinions such as CYPRESS CREEK UTILITY SERVICE COMPANY, INC., Petitioner, v. Mike MULLER Et Al., Respondents are cited where car-accident / fault is disputed. The court stated: "Baylor University, 126 Tex. 99, 84 S.W.2d 703 (1935), in a comparative negligence suit in which the jury apportioned a percentage of negligence to the settling tortfeasor. The trial court rendered judgment for plaintiffs, allowing no Bradshaw credit." That is the language to brief; the rest of the decision supplies the procedural posture.
B & B AUTO SUPPLY, SAND PIT, AND TRUCKING COMPANY, Petitioner, v. CENTRAL FREIGHT LINES, INC., Et Al., Respondents
…ity Among Tortfeasors, 26 Texas L.Rev. 150 (1947); Comment, Comparative Causation, Indemnity, And The Allocation Of Losses Between Joint Tortfeasors In Products Liability Cases, 10 St. Mary’s L.J. 587, 588-90, 594-98 (1979). Application of the doctrine of indemnity results in shifting the entire burden of loss from one tortfeasor to another. See Fisher, Contribution and Indemni…
On car-accident / fault, B & B AUTO SUPPLY, SAND PIT, AND TRUCKING COMPANY, Petitioner, v. CENTRAL FREIGHT LINES, INC., Et Al., Respondents speaks to the Texas dispute in this passage: "Among Tortfeasors, 26 Texas L.Rev. 150 (1947); Comment, Comparative Causation, Indemnity, And The Allocation Of Losses Between Joint Tortfeasors In Products Liability Cases, 10 St. Mary’s L.J. 587, 588-90, 594-98 (1979)." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
ESTATE OF Horace CLIFTON, Et Al., Petitioners, v. SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION CO., Respondent
…river of the van. Consequently, the jury did not answer the comparative negligence issue which was conditioned upon a finding that Bozeman was the driver of the van. When the jury returned its verdict, Southern Pacific requested that the trial court disregard the jury’s failure to find that Bozeman was the driver of the van at the time of the collision. But, Southern Pacific di…
Practitioners open ESTATE OF Horace CLIFTON, Et Al., Petitioners, v. SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION CO., Respondent when Texas car-accident / fault turns on the distinction in this sentence: "Consequently, the jury did not answer the comparative negligence issue which was conditioned upon a finding that Bozeman was the driver of the van." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
Key takeaways
- Fault system: modified comparative fault with a 51% bar (recovery barred if you are more than 50% at fault).
- Controlling authority: Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 33.001.
- In Texas, if you are more than 50% at fault (51%+), you recover nothing. At 50% or less, damages are reduced by your share of fault.
- Personal-injury filing deadline: Two years for personal injury actions under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 16.003..
- Insurance: Texas requires minimum auto liability coverage; proportionate responsibility under Chapter 33 governs insurer indemnity and trial outcomes.
Can you be sued after a car accident in Texas?
Yes. A driver, passenger, pedestrian, or property owner injured in a crash can file a negligence (or related) claim against an allegedly at-fault driver — and against owners or employers in some agency/vicarious-liability settings. Being “mostly not at fault” does not stop a lawsuit from being filed; it shapes whether the plaintiff can win and how much they recover.
You can also be sued even when you believe the other driver is primarily responsible. Fault is usually a contested jury (or settlement) issue under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 33.001.
Frequently asked questions
Can I get sued if the accident was not my fault?
Anyone can file a suit. Winning — and collecting — depends on proving negligence and overcoming Texas’s modified 51 rules under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 33.001.
What if I was partly at fault?
In Texas, if you are more than 50% at fault (51%+), you recover nothing. At 50% or less, damages are reduced by your share of fault.
How long do I have to sue after a car accident in Texas?
Two years for personal injury actions under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 16.003.
Does insurance prevent a lawsuit?
Texas requires minimum auto liability coverage; proportionate responsibility under Chapter 33 governs insurer indemnity and trial outcomes. Coverage disputes are separate from whether a tort claim exists.