Head-On Collision Lawyer in Texas

Sometimes. Tex. Alco. Bev. Code § 2.02, the Texas Dram Shop Act, allows a claim against a licensed provider when (1) the provider sold or served an alcoholic beverage to a person who was obviously intoxicated to the extent that they presented a clear danger to themselves and others, and (2) that intoxication was a proximate cause of the resulting damages. It is a narrower statute than most people assume, and the proof requires working through receipts, surveillance, and server testimony. When it applies, it dramatically expands available coverage.

Yes, when the conduct rises to gross negligence under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 41.003. Driving while intoxicated, particularly at high BAC levels or while wrong-way on a freeway, supports a gross-negligence finding. Exemplary damages are capped in most cases under § 41.008, but the cap does not apply in cases involving certain enumerated criminal offenses, including intoxication assault and intoxication manslaughter under the Texas Penal Code.

Yes. The claim becomes a claim against the at-fault driver's estate, and his auto liability policy still applies on behalf of the estate. Death of a tortfeasor does not extinguish the civil claim; it changes the named defendant and adds procedural steps under the Texas Estates Code. Most files in this posture resolve at the policy level through the carrier without contested probate involvement.

Texas provides two causes of action: a survival claim under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 71.021 for the damages the decedent suffered before death, and a wrongful-death claim under § 71.002 for the damages suffered by the surviving spouse, children, and parents. These are separate elements with different damage categories, and they have to be pled and proved separately. Statutory beneficiaries are tightly defined: siblings, for example, are not eligible beneficiaries under the wrongful-death statute.

TxDOT can be a defendant when a ramp's signage, lighting, or geometry contributed to a wrong-way entry, but suing a state agency under the Texas Tort Claims Act involves notice requirements (six months under § 101.101), damage caps, and immunity defenses. In practice, TxDOT is rarely the primary defendant; it is sometimes a supplemental defendant where the documented history of wrong-way incidents at a specific ramp is strong. The primary defendant remains the impaired driver.

Through physical evidence and reconstruction. Skid marks, gouge marks, debris-field location, and the resting position of the vehicles tell an accident reconstructionist which vehicle crossed the centerline. The crash report's diagram is a starting point but is rarely sufficient on its own; we retain reconstruction experts on every contested-liability head-on file because the difference between 'crossed the line' and 'was crossed into' is the entire case.

Longer than most other car-accident cases. Catastrophic-injury files often run eighteen to thirty-six months because the medical picture has to stabilize, life-care planning has to be done, and multiple insurance layers usually have to be pursued. Fatality cases run on a similar timeline. Settling early in a serious head-on almost always leaves money on the table; the future-medical and lifetime-care components only become provable once treatment plateaus.