Holden P.C.Holden P.C.2026-08-09T20:33:22Zhttps://www.holdenlitigation.com/feed/atom/WordPress/wp-content/uploads/sites/1603842/2022/08/cropped-ID-image-32x32.jpgOn Behalf of Holden P.C.<![CDATA[Premises liability claims at energy facilities: What to know]]>https://www.holdenlitigation.com/?p=512092026-08-09T20:33:22Z2026-08-09T20:33:22ZCommon premises liability hazards
Understanding Texas law is key to protecting your assets. Knowing specific legal defenses can help you stay ahead of potential issues. Since energy sites use heavy machinery and high-voltage equipment, accidents are common. Premises liability claims in this industry often result from these sources:
Slips, trips and falls: Open deck areas, scaffolding failures or slick surfaces near process zones
Heavy equipment: Risks involving cranes, forklifts or unmonitored drop zones
Electrical hazards: Arc flashes, temporary power issues or ungrounded equipment
Equipment breaches: Chemical leaks, gas vents or steam releases during maintenance
Texas property owners may be protected under Chapter 95 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. This law can limit liability for injury claims from contractors or employees. It applies to injuries that happen during construction, repairs or property changes. However, whether this applies depends on the details of each case.
Securing your business
Premises liability risks are a natural part of the energy industry, but they should not threaten the future of your business. If you manage a facility, seeking the guidance of a skilled litigation attorney can help evaluate your risks, improve safety practices and defend your business against complex claims.
]]>On Behalf of Holden P.C.<![CDATA[What is corporate veil piercing and how can you avoid it?]]>https://www.holdenlitigation.com/?p=512072026-07-25T02:54:56Z2026-07-25T02:54:56ZWhen might a court pierce the corporate veil?
Corporate veil piercing is a legal doctrine that allows courts to disregard the legal separation between a corporation or LLC and its owners, shareholders or members. When that occurs, those individuals may be held personally liable for certain business obligations.
Texas is considered pro-business and provides strong liability protections for business owners. Courts are often reluctant to pierce the corporate veil. However, certain factors may increase the risk of it occurring, such as:
Commingling personal and business funds
Failing to maintain separate financial records
Using company assets for personal expenses
Using the business entity to commit fraud or deceive investors
Ignoring required corporate formalities
No one thing will automatically result in veil piercing. Instead, courts generally evaluate the overall conduct of the business and its owners.
One of the most common mistakes business owners make is treating the company account as an extension of their personal finances. To reinforce the company’s separate legal status, it’s crucial to maintain dedicated business bank accounts, accurate accounting records and documented financial transactions.
It’s also essential to avoid fraudulent or misleading conduct. Making false representations to lenders, hiding assets, transferring property to avoid creditors or using multiple entities to shield wrongful conduct increases the likelihood that a court will disregard the company’s separate legal existence.
Forming an LLC or corporation is an important step toward protecting your personal assets, but that protection depends on treating your business as a separate legal entity. A legal professional can help establish appropriate governance practices, draft corporate bylaws and ensure the company remains in compliance with the law.]]>On Behalf of Holden P.C.<![CDATA[Clear labels are often key in product defect defense strategies]]>https://www.holdenlitigation.com/?p=511922026-07-07T20:05:08Z2026-07-07T20:05:08ZAdequate product labels serve several purposes. They can explain how a product should be used, identify foreseeable hazards, provide maintenance instructions and warn against misuse that could lead to injury. When consumers receive understandable information about a product's risks, they are better equipped to use it safely.When a product liability claim is filed, one of the first questions often asked is whether the manufacturer or seller provided adequate warnings and instructions to consumers. While no label can prevent every accident, clear, accurate and well-designed product labeling is frequently an important component of a successful product defect defense strategy.
When labeling takes center stage in negotiations or at trial
Plaintiffs sometimes argue that a product was unreasonably dangerous because its warnings were incomplete, difficult to understand or failed to alert users to known risks. Manufacturers, on the other hand, may demonstrate that a product included prominent warnings, detailed instructions and language that reasonably informed users of foreseeable dangers.Courts may consider whether warnings were placed where users were likely to see them, whether the language was understandable to the intended audience and whether important hazards were emphasized rather than buried in fine print. The use of clear formatting, symbols and concise instructions can strengthen the effectiveness of a warning, and the effectiveness of a defense accordingly. Maintaining records of product testing, safety evaluations, regulatory compliance and revisions to labeling can help demonstrate that a company took reasonable steps to identify and communicate potential risks. By combining clear warnings with sound product design and comprehensive quality assurance practices, manufacturers can better protect consumers while strengthening their legal position if/when claims arise.]]>On Behalf of Holden P.C.<![CDATA[Common defenses to groundwater contamination claims]]>https://www.holdenlitigation.com/?p=511902026-06-30T06:18:07Z2026-07-02T06:12:34ZA groundwater contamination lawsuit threatens Texas companies with massive cleanup costs, property damage awards and reputational harm. When a plaintiff sues, a strong defense team doesn't wait passively. They attack the claim from multiple angles using legal doctrines that Texas courts recognize consistently.
The rule of capture still matters
Texas follows the rule of capture for groundwater. While this doctrine only protects landowners from liability for draining a neighbor's well, it offers no protection or legal defense against claims of groundwater pollution or contamination.Extraction rights and contamination liability stay separate issues under Texas law. Companies that rely on the rule of capture as a shield against pollution claims often find that argument doesn't hold up in court.
Causation poses a major hurdle
Establishing that a specific source caused specific contamination is one of the toughest parts of any groundwater case. Groundwater moves slowly and mixes with multiple sources over time, which complicates the picture significantly. Hydrogeologists often get involved to track contaminant plumes, test soil samples and map underground flow patterns. When several industrial sites sit near the same aquifer, pinpointing the true source becomes a real challenge. This uncertainty shapes how these cases resolve.
Statute of limitations sets a clock
Texas gives plaintiffs two years to file most contamination claims after they discover the injury. Courts look closely at when a property owner first noticed unusual water quality, foul odors or health symptoms. If the evidence shows the injury surfaced years before the lawsuit, the case can get dismissed before it ever reaches trial.
Regulatory compliance carries weight
Companies often argue regulatory compliance to show they met baseline standards, but under Texas law, complying with Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) or Railroad Commission permits does not automatically shield a defendant from negligence liability. However, it weakens claims of recklessness or intentional misconduct. Courts often factor compliance history into decisions about punitive damages.
Pre-existing contamination complicates liability
Some aquifers carry contaminants long before a particular operation even begins. Naturally occurring substances, agricultural runoff or older industrial activity sometimes explain water quality problems better than recent drilling or manufacturing. Sorting out the timeline often becomes central to the case.
The bottom line
Groundwater contamination cases in Texas turn on science, timing and legal doctrine. Companies that understand these principles position themselves strongly against costly litigation.]]>On Behalf of Holden P.C.<![CDATA[What qualities does a good litigator have?]]>https://www.holdenlitigation.com/?p=511892026-06-29T14:38:16Z2026-06-29T14:38:16ZBeing a good litigator is a unique talent. It gives attorneys the ability to aggressively take on cases and pursue them through trial. Often, litigators are dedicated to fighting for the rights of their clients.
One of the key things to focus on is preparation. A good litigator will always work hard behind the scenes to prepare for every case. Their goal is to gather as much information and evidence as possible. They take the time to prepare so that they are ready for the challenges they will face before they even step foot in the courtroom. A good litigator who prepares thoroughly can have a lot of success in a wide variety of cases.
Understanding specific rules
A litigator also understands the rules that go beyond their law school training. Laws can be very different from one state to the next, for example, and even local municipalities can have laws and ordinances that may affect a case. A good litigator will know exactly what rules they are operating under and how those may be unique from one case to the next.
Professionalism and trust
Finally, clients should know that their litigator is a professional who is trustworthy, honest and dedicated to operating with the utmost integrity. This is someone who is dependable and whom they can count on to put their case first. They know that the litigator will fight for their rights, even during a challenging case.We pride ourselves on being aggressive litigators, and we remain dedicated to our clients at every step in the process. If you are interested in joining our team, do not hesitate to look at some of the positions we currently have open.
]]>On Behalf of Holden P.C.<![CDATA[What is comparative negligence and why does it matter?]]>https://www.holdenlitigation.com/?p=511872026-06-18T07:59:05Z2026-06-18T07:59:05ZAccidents can happen in a matter of seconds, but determining who is responsible can be much more complicated. In many personal injury cases, more than one person may have contributed to the events leading up to an accident.
When the question of fault arises, the final outcome of a claim can change significantly. Understanding how comparative negligence works can help businesses understand their potential liability.
How shared fault can affect liability
Comparative negligence is a legal principle used in many states to evaluate situations where multiple parties share responsibility for an accident. Rather than assigning all blame to one person, courts and insurance companies may determine the percentage of fault attributable to each party involved. This helps to create a more complete picture of how the accident occurred.The allocation of fault assigned to each party can have a direct impact on the amount of compensation available in a personal injury claim. Texas follows a form of modified comparative negligence, also known as proportionate responsibility. Under this system, an injured person's compensation may be reduced if they are found to be partially responsible for the accident or injury. In some situations, individuals may be barred from recovering damages altogether if their share of responsibility is found to be greater than 50%.Because comparative negligence can significantly affect liability and damages, these cases often require a careful review of the facts. Evidence such as accident reports, witness statements and surveillance footage may all be used to establish how fault should be divided. Even small changes in fault percentages can have a substantial financial impact on the outcome of a case.For businesses and other defendants, understanding comparative negligence is an important part of evaluating risk and defending against claims. Working with a qualified legal professional can help ensure that the facts are thoroughly examined, liability is accurately assessed and legal interests are effectively protected throughout the process.
]]>On 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.
]]>