Holden P.C.Holden P.C.2026-06-01T18:01:21Zhttps://www.holdenlitigation.com/feed/atom/WordPress/wp-content/uploads/sites/1603842/2022/08/cropped-ID-image-32x32.jpgOn Behalf of Holden P.C.<![CDATA[When post-elopement lawsuits impact a facility]]>https://www.holdenlitigation.com/?p=511852026-06-01T18:01:21Z2026-06-01T18:01:21ZInternal records can defend against lawsuits
Nursing home elopement lawsuits often rely on claims of negligence. Families assert that care providers overlooked safety-critical information or did not follow best practices.
Records of the cognitive testing performed during a resident’s intake process can validate that the facility fulfilled its obligations and provided support as appropriate given the resident’s condition. Documentation of a follow-up screening roughly every one to three years can also help defend against claims that the facility failed to address changes in an older adult’s cognitive capabilities.
Test results, notes from workers and reports from family members can all help show that the care provided aligned with documented needs. The more documentation there is regarding the health of the individual resident and the support services provided to meet their needs, the better the chances of the facility successfully defending against negligence claims.
Those who own or operate nursing homes and similar facilities may need help responding to post-elopement lawsuits brought by family members of the resident who left the facility. Reviewing internal documentation with a legal professional can help care providers respond effectively to pending litigation.
]]>On Behalf of Holden P.C.<![CDATA[Is a trucking company liable for a driver’s mistake?]]>https://www.holdenlitigation.com/?p=511842026-05-21T19:14:51Z2026-05-21T19:14:51ZYes, trucking companies can sometimes be held responsible if a driver makes a mistake and causes a serious accident. This is why trucking companies often carry substantial insurance policies, as injury victims may sue both the company and the truck driver.
That said, certain things have to be demonstrated to show that the company was negligent or should be held responsible. Below are two examples.
Maintenance standards
To begin with, trucks must be properly maintained, and upkeep needs to be done on a set schedule. This reduces the odds of a malfunction—such as a truck’s brakes failing on an incline—causing an accident. A trucking company should always strive to uphold these maintenance standards.
Driver training
Another issue is if drivers do not have the right qualifications or the proper training. The company is responsible for screening candidates and only hiring those who have the correct license and who meet other requirements.
Defense options after an accident
As such, for the owner of a trucking company who has been targeted by a lawsuit, the key to their defense strategy is often providing evidence and documentation showing that the company has upheld its responsibility. Documentation could include records of training the driver received, for instance, or detailed maintenance records showing that the truck itself was not being neglected.That does not necessarily stop a truck driver from making a critical error and causing a car accident, but it can help the trucking company demonstrate that the driver was solely responsible and that the company itself was not. These are very complex cases, so it can help to work with an experienced attorney.
]]>On Behalf of Holden P.C.<![CDATA[How do energy companies limit liability in large-scale claims?]]>https://www.holdenlitigation.com/?p=511822026-05-14T09:22:27Z2026-05-14T09:09:27Z often see energy projects in Texas lead to large claims tied to injuries, environmental harm or contract disputes. These situations can involve several companies at the same time, which often raises financial risk for everyone involved. Because of that, you may notice that planning for liability starts long before any dispute comes up.
Energy companies often try to manage risk early by looking at how problems might spread across a project. As a result, they usually set up contracts and insurance plans in advance so they can better control possible losses later.
Layering insurance policies for financial protection
You often see energy companies rely on more than one insurance policy to handle major claims. A single policy may not cover everything if something serious happens, so companies often stack coverage in layers.These layers usually include
Primary coverage that pays first up to its limit
Excess coverage that kicks in after the first layer runs out
Umbrella coverage that may add extra protection for larger risks
Each layer helps reduce the chance that one company pays the full cost of a major incident. In many cases, this setup also helps companies plan for long term projects with more financial stability.
Structuring contract terms to shift risk
Texas law governs the sharing of responsibility in energy work. For example, Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code often called the Texas Oilfield Anti-Indemnity Act, places limits on how much risk one party can shift to another in oil and gas contracts. It often requires companies to tie risk transfer rules to specific insurance coverage.Because of this, you often see energy companies use contract terms to decide who handles certain types of losses. One party may agree to carry specific insurance or take responsibility for certain job related risks. This helps set clear expectations before work begins and may reduce confusion if a problem happens later.Clear contracts also tend to match insurance duties with project risks. This can help reduce gaps in coverage when several companies share responsibility on the same project.
Coordinating defense strategies in multi party claims
Large energy claims often involve more than one defendant, such as operators, contractors and equipment suppliers. In these situations, you may see the parties work together to handle the case in a more organized way.This coordination may include sharing investigation results and aligning their positions on what caused the issue. As a result, it can help reduce mixed messages in court and may lower duplicated legal costs.
A balanced approach to managing exposure
In many cases, you see energy companies combine insurance planning, contract terms and shared defense strategies to manage risk. Together, these tools may help reduce financial uncertainty when large claims arise in complex energy projects.]]>On Behalf of Holden P.C.<![CDATA[How a waiver helps with injury defense]]>https://www.holdenlitigation.com/?p=511812026-05-07T21:22:10Z2026-05-07T21:22:10ZMany businesses use liability waivers when there are inherent risks to customers who frequent that business. One example would be a gym, where someone could be injured while running or lifting weights. Other examples include businesses that provide access to risky activities like skydiving, rock climbing or whitewater rafting.As a business owner, it is important to understand that a waiver does not mean you can never be sued by a client or customer. There are still situations in which negligence can occur and lawsuits may still be possible. However, a waiver can significantly strengthen your injury defense case – or even prevent the case from reaching the litigation stage altogether.
What are the inherent risks?
Typically, a waiver states that a person cannot sue if they are injured while participating in an activity that they reasonably understood was dangerous.For example, someone may own a bouldering gym, which is a type of rock climbing gym with shorter walls that people climb without ropes. There are mats at the bottom of the walls, but it is still possible for someone to fall and suffer an injury. They could break an ankle during a fall, for instance.If someone is merely injured while climbing the wall and taking an expected fall, they likely cannot sue because they accepted the inherent risks of the activity when signing the waiver. What they would instead have to demonstrate is that there was some form of negligence. For instance, they may claim that the climbing gym did not have appropriate padding on the floor or that one of the climbing holds broke because it had not been properly secured.If the gym owner was negligent, then a lawsuit may still be possible. But if it was simply a routine injury, then the signed waiver may prevent the guest from suing.
Navigating a personal injury defense case
These cases can become complex. A business owner may argue that the injured person signed a waiver releasing the business from liability and that no negligence occurred, while the injured party may claim that unsafe conditions caused the accident.With a significant amount of money and a company’s reputation on the line, it is critical for business owners to understand what legal defense options they have.
]]>On Behalf of Holden P.C.<![CDATA[Data privacy laws every business owner should know]]>https://www.holdenlitigation.com/?p=511662026-04-23T16:57:37Z2026-04-23T16:57:37ZData privacy matters more than ever
Customers are increasingly aware of how their data is used and paying closer attention to how businesses handle it. Failing to comply with privacy laws can result in fines, lawsuits and reputational harm.
However, businesses that prioritize their customers' privacy can build stronger relationships and stand out in today's competitive market.
Texas recently implemented the Texas Data Privacy and Security Act (TDPSA), which establishes requirements for how businesses collect, use, store and share personal data. It gives consumers important rights, such as:
The ability to access the personal data a business collects
Requesting the business to correct or delete their data
Opting out of certain types of data processing, such as targeted advertising
In addition to state laws, several federal laws regulate how certain types of data must be handled. Many of these laws are industry-specific:
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA): Applies to health care providers and businesses that handle protected health information (PHI).
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act: Governs financial institutions and requires safeguards for financial data.
The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act: Imposes rules on businesses that collect data from children under 13.
If your business operates online or has customers outside the United States, you also need to be aware of international laws. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) may apply if you collect data from residents in the European Union.
Many businesses don't intentionally violate the law. However, they sometimes overlook basic compliance steps. Working with legal professionals can help ensure your business meets current regulations. If you're facing claims of violating data privacy laws, they can also provide valuable guidance.]]>On Behalf of Holden P.C.<![CDATA[When former employees claim that a layoff was discriminatory]]>https://www.holdenlitigation.com/?p=511502026-04-03T15:47:28Z2026-04-03T15:47:28ZHow can employers respond effectively?
Prevention is the best medicine in a wrongful termination scenario. The steps taken before laying workers off can help counter claims that the process was discriminatory. Documentation of job performance and other factors that influence the decision-making process can help push back against claims that the company considered protected characteristics when deciding which workers should keep their jobs in which ones were included in the layoff.
Ideally, employers review the list of proposed layoffs carefully to look for trends, as that can help prevent claims of discrimination based on layoffs having a disproportionate impact on certain groups. If layoffs have already occurred and terminated workers now assert that they belong to a group disproportionately affected, the company could be at risk of a wrongful termination lawsuit. Employers may need to defend their decision-making process and overall employment practices.
Discussing major staffing moves with an employment and labor law attorney can help organizational leadership minimize the risks of post-layoff wrongful termination litigation. Appropriate preventative measures and assertive responses to pending lawsuits can both limit the negative impact of layoff-related worker litigation.]]>On Behalf of Holden P.C.<![CDATA[The care plan mistakes that can lead to lawsuits]]>https://www.holdenlitigation.com/?p=511492026-03-19T17:03:57Z2026-03-19T17:03:57ZCare plans are the foundation of providing quality care in nursing homes. Individualized plans detail how to address falls, prevent elopements and treat pressure ulcers.
But when care plans are poorly developed or inconsistently followed, they can result in a resident's health decline. In addition, care plan breakdowns increase exposure to lawsuits, regulatory penalties and reputational harm.
Why care plans matter in litigation
State and federal laws require nursing homes tocreate individualized care plans based on comprehensive assessments of residents and to update them as residents' conditions change. In a lawsuit, care plans are often used as evidence. The care plan requirements are compared to what the staff actually did. Any inconsistency between the two can be used to argue negligence.A frequent issue is using a cookie-cutter approach to care planning and failing to individualize it to the resident's needs. Generic plans may save time, but they fail to address a resident's specific risks, such as a history of falls, chronic urinary tract infections or cognitive decline. Defending a one-size-fits-all care plan is difficult when a preventable incident occurs.Another problem is relying on outdated assessments. Care plans are to be reviewed every 90 days or when there is a significant change in the resident's physical, mental or psychosocial status. A care plan must reflect the resident's current condition, not how they were weeks or months earlier. If the care plan isn't updated as the resident's mobility, cognition or health status changes, then staff may unknowingly provide inadequate care.A nursing home risks liability if staff fail to follow the resident's care plan. A well-written plan means very little if there is a gap between policy and practice. If the plan requires fall precautions or repositioning schedules and those interventions aren't consistently implemented, it can become the basis for a claim.Documentation issues also play a major role. It's often said, "If you didn't document it, then you didn't do it." Even if someone provided the care, but didn't chart it, it can undermine a facility's defense.Care plan failures are a common source of lawsuits against nursing homes. But they are also among the most preventable. Accurate, communicated and consistently applied care plans improve resident outcomes and strengthen anursing home's legal defense.]]>On Behalf of Holden P.C.<![CDATA[The 2 degrees of liability: Negligence vs. gross negligence]]>https://www.holdenlitigation.com/?p=511482026-03-06T18:13:43Z2026-03-06T18:13:43ZThe burden of clear and convincing evidence
Plaintiffs face a very difficult task when they seek exemplary damages designed to punish a company. Under the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, a claimant must prove gross negligence by "clear and convincing evidence" to receive such an award. Besides that, this is a much higher threshold than the standard used for basic compensation.
In Oklahoma, while gross negligence is defined as a lack of even slight care, a plaintiff must typically show reckless disregard to qualify for punitive awards. Therefore, the law requires strong proof before a jury can issue these heavy financial penalties.
The two-pronged test for conscious indifference
Under Texas law, gross negligence is legally different from a simple mistake or a lapse in judgment. It requires meeting both an objective and a subjective test. First, the act or omission must involve an extreme degree of risk to others.
Second, the defendant must have possessed actual awareness of that risk but proceeded anyway. Most importantly, proving awareness of a minor risk is not enough to meet this high legal bar. Because of these strict rules, a plaintiff must prove the company knew about a major danger and chose to ignore it.
Manage your corporate litigation risk
Securing your assets requires a precise understanding of how regional courts evaluate punitive damages. Because the difference between negligence and gross negligence involves complex facts, these issues often go to a jury.
A strong record of safety compliance is not a guarantee of a win, but it is vital evidence for your litigation defense strategy. These cases require a deep understanding of legal thresholds to address the risks of high-stakes litigation.
Strategic steps for your next defense
Consult with counsel to evaluate how your internal policies align with the specific proof required to defeat claims for exemplary damages. Proper preparation is the best way to handle these complex legal challenges.]]>On Behalf of Holden P.C.<![CDATA[Energy infrastructure is often at the center of disputes ]]>https://www.holdenlitigation.com/?p=511472026-03-06T11:46:33Z2026-03-06T11:46:33ZLarge energy infrastructure projects are often at the center of legal challenges. Pipelines, large-scale generation facilities, transmission lines, and export terminals will often affect multiple communities, move through various regulatory jurisdictions and impact several environmental resources.
Energy infrastructure projects typically require several approvals and permits before construction can begin. These may bring in local, state and federal agencies that have to review considerations like water resources, environmental impact, land use and wildlife considerations. Oftentimes, this means there are many steps, each of which comes with the possibility of a legal dispute from property owners, governments and advocacy groups.
Defending against countless claims
Many of the disputes are centered on whether developers complied with regulatory and statutory frameworks. Courts review these claims by checking environmental assessments, administrative records and the reasoning provided by applicable agencies throughout the review process. Disputes may make arguments that include a failure to fully consider alternative plans or inadequately addressing public concerns. In some cases, they may call the environmental impacts into question by claiming they were underestimated during the review process. Even land use and easements can lead to disputes that put new energy infrastructure on hold. Defending against these claims is often based on showing that the project was properly planned and reviewed. Regulatory compliance is critical because defenses can’t move forward if there’s an issue with compliance. Having expert witnesses may also be beneficial in these cases, but it can often be challenging to find the ones who will uphold your defense. Working with someone who’s familiar with environmental law and the regulations associated with various projects may be beneficial as you work to defend your project against these legal claims. ]]>On Behalf of Holden P.C.<![CDATA[Comparative negligence: when responsibility is shared]]>https://www.holdenlitigation.com/?p=511352026-02-24T08:29:04Z2026-02-24T08:29:04ZAccidents rarely happen in a vacuum. In many personal injury disputes, multiple actions, decisions or failures contribute to the outcome, creating a more complicated picture of responsibility.
From a defense perspective, these cases demand precision, strategy and a clear understanding of how fault is actually assigned. When responsibility is shared, the details matter, and they matter a lot.
Understanding comparative negligence in personal injury defense
Comparative negligence is a legal doctrine that recognizes that more than one party can contribute to an accident or injury. Rather than assigning all responsibility to a single defendant, the jury evaluates the conduct of everyone involved and allocates fault by percentage. That allocation directly impacts what, if anything, a claimant is able to recover.In Texas, comparative fault follows a modified comparative responsibility model. An injured party may recover damages only if their percentage of responsibility for the accident is 50% or less. Once a claimant is found 51% or more at fault, recovery is barred entirely. This threshold is often the most decisive issue in a personal injury defense case, because even a small shift in fault allocation can determine whether damages are reduced or eliminated.For the defense, this framework creates critical opportunities. Evidence of a claimant’s own negligence, such as failing to follow safety protocols, ignoring warnings or engaging in risky behavior, can significantly reduce exposure.Comparative fault cases are rarely straightforward. They require a thorough investigation of the incident, careful analysis of timelines and strategic use of expert testimony. When fault is divided, the margin between a manageable resolution and a costly verdict can be narrow. If you are facing a personal injury claim where responsibility is disputed, having a professional legal team that knows how to press these issues can make a meaningful difference.
]]>