Can You Sue for a Slip and Fall Accident in Texas?
You can sue, but the question people are really asking is whether they will win. That turns on one element more than the others, and it is not the one most people expect.
- 138Google reviews
- 3Attorneys on your case
- 2 yrsTexas filing deadline
- No feeUnless we win
Falling is not enough
Texas does not make an occupier responsible simply because someone fell on its premises. There is no strict liability for injuries on property, and the fact that a fall occurred says nothing about whether anyone was negligent.
That is the honest starting point, and it is why a proportion of people who fall have no claim. A genuinely unforeseeable hazard, or one that appeared moments before, does not create liability.
What has to be established
A condition posing an unreasonable risk of harm. Knowledge, actual or constructive. A failure to exercise reasonable care. And causation linking that failure to the injury.
Each is separate, and a claim can satisfy three and fail on the fourth. The knowledge element is where most cases are decided.
Knowledge is usually the deciding element
Actual knowledge is rare, because occupiers do not often document knowing about a hazard and leaving it. Constructive knowledge is the usual route: showing the hazard existed long enough that a reasonable inspection would have found it.
That is a question about time, and it is answered by inspection logs and camera footage. A spill present for forty minutes in a store claiming hourly sweeps supports a claim; the same spill ninety seconds before the fall usually does not.
Where you were and why
Your status as invitee, licensee or trespasser determines the duty owed. A customer in a shop is an invitee and is owed the fullest duty including inspection. A social guest is generally a licensee and is owed less.
Occupiers argue this reclassification more often than people expect, because moving a claimant from invitee to licensee removes the constructive knowledge route entirely.
Your own responsibility
Recovery is reduced by your percentage and barred above 50 percent. Expect arguments about footwear, distraction, phone use and ignoring signage.
None is automatically decisive. Where the hazard was disguised by lighting or flooring pattern, or where there was no reasonable alternative route, the argument weakens considerably.
The honest assessment
A claim is worth bringing where a hazard existed for a meaningful period, where the occupier either created it or should have found it, and where the injury required real treatment.
It is usually not where the hazard appeared moments earlier and nobody could reasonably have found it. A firm telling you every fall is a case is not being straight with you.
Summary
| Circumstance | Likely position |
|---|---|
| Spill present for a long period, no inspection | Strong |
| Recurring problem with prior incident reports | Strong |
| Hazard created by a staff member | Strong, knowledge is presumed |
| Spill occurred moments before the fall | Usually not actionable |
| Hazard open, obvious and avoidable | Difficult |
| Claimant reclassified as a licensee | Much harder |
Keep reading
Texas Premises Liability Lawyer
A property owner is not automatically responsible when someone is hurt on their land.
Practice areaTrampoline Park Injury Claims in Texas
Trampoline parks require a signed waiver before anyone is allowed to jump.
ReadSlip and Fall Claims in Texas
A slip and fall claim in Texas rarely turns on whether the floor was dangerous.
ReadSettlements Without Surgery
Surgery is the single largest variable in a slip and fall claim, so a case that resolves without it is valued on a different basis.
ReadPremises Liability Lawsuits in Texas
Most premises claims settle. Suit becomes necessary when the occupier disputes that it knew about...
ReadWhat To Do After a Slip and Fall
The hazard that caused the fall will be cleaned up within minutes and the footage overwritten within days.
Read
Frequently asked questions
You can bring a claim, but falling is not enough on its own. Texas requires a condition posing an unreasonable risk, knowledge actual or constructive, a failure to exercise reasonable care, and causation.
That usually defeats the claim. Constructive knowledge requires the hazard to have existed long enough that a reasonable inspection would have found it, so a spill occurring moments before is generally not actionable.
It is raised as a share of responsibility rather than as a bar. Recovery is reduced by your percentage and barred only above 50 percent, and the argument weakens where the hazard was disguised or unavoidable.
Possibly, but the duty owed is narrower. A social guest is generally a licensee, which usually requires the occupier to have had actual knowledge of the hazard rather than merely being able to find it on inspection.
Talk it through with a lawyer
A free consultation covers whether you have a claim, what the deadline is, and what insurance is actually available.
Contingency fee. You pay nothing unless we win.