Midland, Texas Mass Shooting — Legal Rights of Victims and Families
If you are reading this page, you or someone you love was in Midland on the morning of June 12, 2026, when a fugitive armed with a firearm opened fire on bystanders and responding police officers. One person — Edward Randall Scott, 62, of Midland — was killed. Ten others were wounded. Nine were taken to Midland Memorial Hospital, where four were rushed into emergency surgery and five were admitted in stable condition and later discharged. The suspected shooter was found dead inside an abandoned veterinary clinic after a four-hour standoff.
You are probably sitting with a mixture of grief, anger, and confusion — and you may be hearing from people who sound sympathetic but are not on your side. This page exists to give you what nobody has given you yet: a clear, honest explanation of what the law allows your family to do, what evidence is disappearing right now, and what the path forward looks like. We are Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC — and we wrote this for one person: you.
What Happened in Midland on June 12, 2026
On Friday morning, June 12, 2026, at approximately 8:00 a.m. local time, a 45-year-old Odessa resident who had been wanted since Wednesday for attempted capital murder of a police officer opened fire on bystanders and responding officers in Midland, Texas. The Texas Department of Public Safety confirmed that the suspect had allegedly fired multiple shots at police during a car chase on Wednesday before fleeing and going into hiding. When officers attempted to apprehend him on Friday, he began shooting.
Edward Randall Scott, 62, of Midland, was killed. Ten others were injured. No law enforcement officers were hurt. The suspect barricaded himself inside an abandoned veterinary clinic and was found dead in the building around 12:30 p.m. — four hours after the shooting began.
Nine victims were transported to Midland Memorial Hospital, the primary Level III trauma-serving facility in the region. Four underwent emergency surgery — meaning their injuries were serious enough to require operative intervention, likely gunshot wounds to vital regions of the body. Five were admitted in stable condition and have since been discharged. The condition of the tenth victim has not been publicly specified.
The criminal case effectively closed with the shooter’s death. But the civil case — the one that can provide accountability and financial support for the families — is just beginning. And it runs through a different door than the one most people expect.
Who Was Hurt — and Who Is Responsible
Edward Randall Scott was a 62-year-old resident of Midland. He was a person — not a statistic, not a headline. He left behind family members who, under Texas law, may have the right to bring a wrongful death claim for his loss. Ten other people were wounded — some seriously enough to require surgery, others injured in ways that may not fully surface for weeks or months. Every one of them has a story, and every one of them has rights.
The shooter is dead. His estate is legally responsible for the harm he caused, but in practical terms, a deceased shooter’s estate is likely to have minimal assets, and most insurance policies exclude intentional acts. This means the real question — the one that determines whether these families can recover meaningful compensation — is whether other parties share legal responsibility for what happened.
This is the conversation most families are not prepared for. The criminal justice system answers the question “who pulled the trigger.” The civil justice system asks a different question: “Who else failed to prevent this, when they had a duty to act?” In a mass shooting case, that question can point to property owners who failed to provide adequate security, owners of vacant buildings who left them unsecured, and potentially governmental entities that knew a dangerous fugitive was at large but failed to warn the public or apprehend him before he reached a populated area.
Not every theory will survive investigation. But the investigation is the prerequisite to knowing which ones do. And that investigation has to start now, because the evidence is already disappearing.
Your Legal Rights After a Mass Shooting in Texas
Texas law provides several paths to civil recovery after a mass shooting. The shooter’s death does not close the courthouse door — it redirects the case toward the parties whose negligence may have contributed to the tragedy. Here is what the law allows:
Wrongful death claims under Texas law permit surviving spouses, children, and parents of the person killed to recover damages for the loss of their loved one. This includes loss of earning capacity, loss of care, maintenance, support, counsel, and society — the human losses a family suffers when someone is taken from them.
Survival actions allow the estate of the person killed to recover damages that the decedent would have been entitled to recover had they lived — including conscious pain and suffering between the time of injury and death, and medical expenses incurred during that period.
Personal injury claims are available to each of the ten injured victims, covering medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, and potentially future medical care and psychological treatment.
Premises liability and negligent security claims may be available against property owners who failed to protect people on their property from foreseeable criminal acts. This is where the investigation matters most — because the viability of these claims depends entirely on where the shooting occurred, what security measures were in place, and what the property owner knew or should have known about the risk.
Texas wrongful death and survival actions are governed by Chapter 71 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, which permits surviving spouses, children, and parents to recover wrongful death damages, and the estate to recover survival damages for the decedent’s pain, suffering, and medical expenses between injury and death.
Intentional tort claims against the shooter’s estate — assault and battery — are technically available to each of the ten injured victims, but insurance policies typically exclude intentional acts, and the estate’s assets are likely minimal. These claims preserve the judgment potential but may not yield meaningful recovery without a viable institutional defendant.
Governmental claims — against law enforcement or other governmental entities for failing to apprehend the fugitive or warn the public — are theoretically possible but face near-insurmountable barriers under the Texas Tort Claims Act, which provides very limited waivers of sovereign immunity, particularly for discretionary law enforcement functions. Any governmental claim requires strict notice-of-claim compliance within short statutory deadlines. This is a theory that requires careful, case-specific evaluation by an attorney — and it should not be pursued without understanding the deadlines that apply.
Wrongful Death and Survival Actions Under Texas Law
Texas treats a fatal injury as two separate legal claims — and a family that walks through only one door leaves money on the table.
The wrongful death claim belongs to the surviving family members — the spouse, children, and parents of Edward Randall Scott. It compensates the family for what they lost: the financial support he would have provided, the guidance and counsel he would have offered, the companionship and society that were taken from them. In Texas, the wrongful death statute creates these rights specifically for the surviving spouse, children, and parents — and the question of who qualifies as a statutory beneficiary is the first threshold question in any death case.
The survival action belongs to the estate. It steps into the legal shoes of the person who died and recovers what he would have recovered had he lived — the pain and suffering he experienced between the moment of injury and the moment of death, the medical expenses incurred during that period, and funeral costs. If Mr. Scott survived even briefly after being shot — and the fact that he was transported to a hospital suggests he may have — the survival action can carry significant damages for conscious pain and suffering.
Texas applies a modified comparative negligence standard with a 51% bar. This means a plaintiff’s recovery is reduced by their percentage of fault, and they are barred entirely if they are more than 51% at fault. In a mass shooting case, the victims’ fault is rarely at issue — they were bystanders. But this rule matters when multiple defendants are involved and the jury is asked to apportion fault among them.
The statute of limitations for both wrongful death and personal injury in Texas is generally two years from the date of injury or death. That means the filing deadline for claims arising from the June 12, 2026 shooting is approximately June 12, 2028. Two years sounds like a long time. It is not. The investigation, expert retention, and case preparation needed to file a well-pleaded complaint take months — and the evidence that the case depends on is dying on a much shorter clock.
Texas does not impose a universal cap on non-economic damages in non-medical-malpractice tort cases. This means pain and suffering, mental anguish, and loss of society are not arbitrarily capped the way they are in some states. This is one of Texas’s strongest advantages for victims — and it is exactly why the insurance company’s lawyers know these cases by heart.
Punitive damages in Texas require clear and convincing evidence of malice or gross negligence — a higher standard than ordinary negligence. Against the shooter’s estate, the intentional criminal conduct would support punitive damages, but recovery is limited by estate assets. Against any premises defendant, punitives require proof that the defendant was consciously indifferent to a known risk — a standard that can be met when a property owner ignored documented prior crime at its property and failed to take basic security measures.
Premises Liability: When Property Owners Fail to Protect
This is where a mass shooting case separates from a criminal case. The criminal case asks who pulled the trigger. The civil case asks whether a property owner failed to protect the people on its property from a foreseeable criminal act — and the answer to that question can be the difference between a minimal recovery and a substantial one.
Texas premises liability law imposes on property owners a duty of reasonable care to protect invitees — people who are on the property for a business purpose — from foreseeable third-party criminal acts. The key word is “foreseeable.” A property owner is not an insurer of every person’s safety against every possible crime. But when the owner knew or should have known that criminal activity was a risk on the property, and failed to take reasonable security measures, the owner can be held liable for the harm that follows.
The foreseeability analysis is where the Midland-Odessa area’s history becomes relevant. The Midland-Odessa metropolitan area has experienced prior mass-casualty violence, including a 2019 rampage shooting. This history is not just a tragedy — it is evidence. It is part of the foreseeability argument that a property owner in this region should have been aware that mass violence was a known risk and should have taken reasonable steps to protect people on its property.
The specific security measures that a property owner should have taken depend on the property type and location — but they can include adequate lighting, surveillance cameras, access control, security personnel, and barriers. When a shooting occurs on commercial property and the owner had no security measures in place — or had measures that were broken, inadequate, or purely decorative — that gap is the case.
The initial investigative priority is identifying exactly where the bystander shooting occurred. Was it on commercial property? A public street? A parking lot? A mixed venue? This single fact determines whether viable premises liability and negligent security defendants exist beyond the shooter’s estate. It is the binary question that drives the entire case value.
If you were hurt or a loved one was killed in a shooting at a business, hotel, or other commercial property, our premises liability and negligent security practice is built to investigate exactly that question — who owned the property, what did they know, and what should they have done.
The Abandoned Veterinary Clinic: Vacant Property Duties in Texas
The suspect barricaded himself inside an abandoned veterinary clinic — and that fact raises its own legal question. The owner of a vacant commercial building in Texas has duties to secure the property, particularly in an area with documented prior mass violence. If the building was left unsecured — no boarding, no fencing, no locks — and that failure to secure enabled the suspect to hide and prolong the incident, the property owner’s negligence may be a proximate cause of the prolonged exposure to danger.
Texas municipal property maintenance codes and local ordinances may govern the securing of abandoned commercial buildings. If the veterinary clinic owner violated local vacant-property requirements, that violation may serve as evidence of negligence — or, in some jurisdictions, negligence per se. The property records, deed records, and maintenance history for the abandoned clinic are public records that can identify the ownership entity, its knowledge of the property’s condition, and any prior code violations.
This is not a speculative theory. It is a recognized area of premises liability law: when a property owner leaves a vacant building unsecured in an area where criminal activity is foreseeable, and that building becomes a refuge for a dangerous person, the owner’s failure to maintain and secure the property can be a proximate cause of the harm that follows. The question is whether the abandoned veterinary clinic was properly secured — and if it was not, who owned it and what did they know.
Evidence That Is Disappearing Right Now
The evidence that will decide these cases is on a clock — and the clock is much shorter than the two-year statute of limitations. Here is what exists, who holds it, and how fast it can legally die:
Surveillance footage from businesses and properties near the shooting scene. This is the single most important and most perishable piece of evidence. Most commercial CCTV systems overwrite on a 7-to-30-day cycle. The footage that shows the exact sequence of events, the shooter’s movements, the victims’ locations, the property conditions, and whether any security measures existed or functioned — that footage is being recorded over right now. Immediate preservation letters to every business and property owner near the scene are the only thing that stops the overwrite cycle. Every day that passes without a preservation demand is a day the footage may be gone.
Police body-worn camera and dash camera footage from both the Friday response and the Wednesday car chase. This documents the shooting, the police response timeline, the suspect’s actions, and the Wednesday fugitive incident that establishes foreseeability and law enforcement knowledge. Under Texas law enforcement retention policies, this footage is retained for days to weeks — and can be requested through formal channels, but subject to active-investigation holds. The body camera footage from the Friday response is the most complete real-time record of what happened, and it must be requested before routine deletion.
911 call records, dispatch logs, and police radio traffic from both the Wednesday and Friday incidents. These establish what law enforcement knew about the fugitive’s location and danger level, whether public warnings were considered or issued, and the timeline of response. These are available through public records requests but may be held during the active investigation.
Property records, deed records, and maintenance history for the abandoned veterinary clinic and the shooting location. These identify the ownership entities, their knowledge of property condition, prior code violations, and whether the abandoned property was properly secured per local ordinance. Municipal inspection files and complaint histories may be purged — request them promptly.
Medical records for all eleven victims from Midland Memorial Hospital and treating providers. These document injury severity, surgical interventions, prognosis, and create the damages foundation for each individual claim. These are stable but must be obtained through HIPAA-compliant authorizations. The surgical records for the four patients who underwent emergency surgery should be requested immediately, while treating physicians’ impressions are fresh.
Victim and witness statements. Eyewitness accounts of the shooting sequence, property conditions, security presence or absence, and emotional impact. Witness memory degrades rapidly — within weeks, details blur and recollections shift. Formal statement preservation through professional investigators should begin within 30 days. Witnesses may also relocate, especially in a transient oil-and-gas community like Midland.
The suspect’s criminal history, Wednesday incident report, and outstanding warrant documentation. These establish the foreseeability of the Friday attack, the known danger level, and whether law enforcement had specific knowledge that should have triggered public warning or expedited apprehension. These are available through records requests but may be restricted during the active investigation.
Scene evidence — spent casings, bullet trajectories, property damage at the shooting location. This reconstructs the shooting to determine where victims were struck, whether they were on specific properties, and whether physical barriers or security measures could have prevented or mitigated harm. The crime scene will be released by law enforcement within days to weeks. Immediate request for scene access and forensic documentation is essential — once the scene is released and the property is cleaned or repaired, the physical evidence is gone.
The Insurance Adjuster’s Playbook — and How to Counter It
If you or a family member was injured or killed in this shooting, you need to understand what is about to happen. The insurance companies and their representatives are already working — and their goal is to minimize what they pay you. Here are the plays they run, and how to counter each one:
Play 1: The “just checking in” recorded statement call. Within days, someone friendly will call to “check on you” and ask you to “just tell us what happened” — on a recording engineered to be quoted against you. They will sound sympathetic. They are not your friend. The counter: do not give a recorded statement to any insurance company without your attorney present. Everything you say can and will be used to reduce or deny your claim. The simple phrase “I need to speak with my attorney first” stops this play cold.
Play 2: The fast settlement check with a release attached. A check may arrive quickly — sometimes before the full medical picture is clear, sometimes before the surgical patients have even left the hospital. Attached to that check will be a release — a document that, once signed, gives up your right to seek any further compensation. The counter: never sign a release without having it reviewed by an attorney. A check that arrives before the medical results is designed to close the case before you know what your injuries are actually worth.
Play 3: The IME doctor they pick. The insurance company may ask you to see “their doctor” for an “independent medical examination.” This doctor is not independent — the insurance company selected them, pays them, and relies on them to minimize your injuries. The counter: you have the right to be treated by your own doctors. Be cautious about attending an IME without understanding what it is and how the results will be used.
Play 4: Social media surveillance. Investigators will monitor your social media accounts for posts that can be used to minimize your injuries — a photo of you smiling at a family event, a post about feeling “okay,” anything that can be taken out of context to suggest you are not as hurt as you claim. The counter: set your accounts to private, do not post about the incident or your injuries, and assume everything you post is being watched.
Play 5: The “we need more time” delay. The insurance company may say they are “still investigating” or “need more documentation” — running the clock toward the statute of limitations. The counter: do not let the insurance company control the timeline. Your attorney sets the deadlines, not the adjuster. And the preservation letters that freeze the evidence go out the day you call — not when the insurance company finishes its “investigation.”
Lupe Peña spent years inside a national insurance-defense firm — the rooms where adjusters and their software decided how to deny, delay, and devalue people exactly like you. He sat in those rooms. He knows how claims are priced, how reserves are set, how IME doctors are selected, and how delay tactics work. Now he sits on your side of the table. That insider knowledge is not a marketing claim — it is a weapon, and it is exactly what a mass shooting victim needs against an insurance company that is already working to minimize your claim.
What This Case Is Worth — An Honest Assessment
We will not promise you a number. We will tell you the truth about what drives the number — and why the range is so wide.
The value of these cases is binary. It depends on a single question: does the investigation identify a viable premises or negligent security defendant with adequate insurance coverage?
If recovery is limited to the shooter’s estate: The total recovery across all victims is likely limited to low six figures. The shooter’s estate probably has minimal assets. Most insurance policies — homeowners, renters — exclude intentional acts. The estate claim preserves the judgment potential and may trigger any applicable liability coverage, but the realistic recovery is modest. In this scenario, the aggregate value across all eleven victims might range from $250,000 to $1,000,000 — split among all claimants.
If investigation identifies a viable premises defendant: The aggregate value across one wrongful death and ten injury claims could reach eight figures. Here is why: Texas does not cap non-economic damages in non-medical-malpractice cases. One wrongful death claim, four surgical gunshot wound cases, five stable injury cases, one unspecified case, and PTSD exposure across all surviving victims — in a venue where the jury will be from Midland County — could produce substantial aggregate exposure. The severity of harm, the number of victims, the surgical interventions, the PTSD exposure, and the aggravating circumstance of a known fugitive at large in an area with prior mass-violence history all drive the value upward. In this scenario, the aggregate value could range from $15,000,000 to $50,000,000 or more.
This is why the investigation is the case. The day you call is the day the investigation begins — and the preservation letters that freeze the evidence go out before the funeral, not after the insurance company calls.
Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes. But the framework above is how a trial lawyer honestly evaluates a mass shooting case — and it is why we will not give you a number until we have done the work that tells us which side of that binary we are on.
The Medicine: Gunshot Wounds and Psychological Trauma
The four victims who underwent emergency surgery at Midland Memorial Hospital suffered injuries serious enough to require operative intervention. Gunshot wounds that require surgery typically involve damage to vital organs, major blood vessels, or structures that cannot be repaired without an operation. The surgical records from Midland Memorial — a Level III trauma center — will document the specific injuries, the procedures performed, and the prognosis. Because Midland Memorial is the primary trauma-serving facility in the region, these patients likely received definitive care locally rather than requiring transfer to a higher-level trauma center.
But the physical injuries are only part of the medical picture. Every person who was present during the shooting — the ten injured survivors and the witnesses — is at risk for post-traumatic stress disorder. PTSD is not a mood. It is not an exaggeration. It is a formal psychiatric diagnosis with eight separate diagnostic criteria under the DSM-5, and a survivor has to meet every one of them: the traumatic event itself, the intrusive memories and nightmares that will not stop, the avoidance of places and thoughts that trigger the memory, the negative changes in mood and cognition, the alterations in arousal and reactivity — hypervigilance, exaggerated startle, sleep disturbance — symptoms that last more than a month and that impair the person’s ability to function.
The defense will call it “subjective.” The medicine says otherwise. PTSD is diagnosed with validated clinical instruments — the CAPS-5 and the PCL-5 — that create an objective, scoreable record of the injury. It is proven with neuropsychological testing, clinical interviews, and the testimony of treating psychiatrists and psychologists. The injury is invisible — but it is not imaginary. And in Texas, it is recoverable as non-economic damage.
For a mass shooting survivor, the PTSD may not fully surface for weeks or even months. The DSM-5 expressly recognizes a “delayed expression” specifier — full diagnostic criteria may not be met until six months or more after the event. A survivor who seems “fine” in the first weeks may not be fine. The psychological injury can develop and worsen over time, which is why early mental health evaluation and treatment are not just medically important — they are legally important, because they create the contemporaneous record that defeats the defense argument that the psychological harm was caused by something else.
The life-care planning implications are significant. For the surgical patients, the future may include revision surgeries, rehabilitation, scarring treatment, and ongoing medical monitoring. For all survivors, the future may include years of psychiatric treatment, medication, and therapy. A life-care planner builds the cost stream — every surgery, every therapy session, every medication, every piece of equipment — and a forensic economist reduces it to present value. That is how a real damages number is built. And the adjuster’s first offer is a fraction of it.
The First 72 Hours: What to Do Now
If you or a family member was affected by the Midland shooting, here is what matters most in the first 72 hours:
Medical first — and document everything. If you were injured and have not been seen by a doctor, go now. Some gunshot injuries — and many psychological injuries — do not show their full severity in the first hours. The emergency department at Midland Memorial is where the most serious injuries are being treated, but even if you were discharged, follow up with your own physician. Keep every discharge instruction, every medical record, every prescription. If you are experiencing nightmares, anxiety, flashbacks, or emotional numbness, tell your doctor — these are the early signs of PTSD, and documenting them now creates the contemporaneous record that defeats the defense argument that your psychological harm was caused by something else.
Do not give a recorded statement to any insurance company. Not yet. Not without your attorney present. The insurance adjuster’s recorded statement call is engineered to get you to say “I’m feeling okay” or to describe the event in a way that can be quoted against you later. The phrase “I need to speak with my attorney first” is your right — exercise it.
Do not sign anything from an insurance company without having it reviewed. A release is a permanent surrender of your right to seek further compensation. A check that arrives before the medical results is designed to close your case before you know what your injuries are worth.
Do not post about the incident on social media. Investigators are watching. A photo of you at a family event, a post about feeling “okay,” anything that can be taken out of context — all of it can be used to minimize your claim. Set your accounts to private and assume everything is being monitored.
Preserve evidence. If you have photos or videos from the scene, save them. If you have clothing or personal items damaged in the shooting, do not discard them — they are physical evidence. If you witnessed the shooting, write down everything you remember now, while the memory is fresh. Witness memory degrades rapidly, and a written account created within days is far more powerful than a recollection offered months later.
If a loved one was killed, understand the personal representative process. Before any wrongful death lawsuit can be filed, a court appoints a personal representative — the person Texas law authorizes to bring the family’s case. This is a procedural step, but it is the gateway to the courthouse. We handle this appointment as part of the representation.
Call an attorney. The preservation letters that freeze the surveillance footage, the body camera evidence, the 911 records, and the property documentation go out the day you call — not the day the insurance company finishes its “investigation.” Every day you wait is a day the evidence is dying. The consultation is free. The call is confidential. And you do not owe us anything unless we win your case.
How Attorney911 Helps Mass Shooting Victims
We have handled mass-casualty litigation before. Our work on the Route 91 Harvest Festival mass shooting wrongful death litigation taught us what these cases demand — not just legal knowledge, but the investigative infrastructure to identify every viable defendant, the evidence-preservation protocol to freeze what is disappearing, and the trial-readiness to take the case to a jury when the insurance company will not pay what it should.
Here is what we do — and what we pull first in a case like this:
The preservation letter goes out immediately. The day you call, we send written demands to every business, property owner, and government agency that holds evidence. This letter legally obligates them to preserve the surveillance footage, the body camera data, the 911 records, the property documentation, and every other piece of evidence before it can be overwritten, deleted, or “lost.” This is the single most time-sensitive step in the entire case.
We investigate the property. Where exactly did the shooting occur? Was it on commercial property? A public street? A parking lot? Who owned it? What security measures were in place — or not? What did the owner know about crime in the area? These questions drive the entire case value, and we pursue them with forensic security consultants, crime scene reconstructionists, and public-records research.
We investigate the abandoned veterinary clinic. Who owned it? Was it secured? Were there local ordinances requiring vacant commercial buildings to be boarded, fenced, or locked? Did the owner have notice of prior trespass or criminal activity at the property? If the building was unsecured and that failure enabled the suspect to barricade and prolong the incident, the owner’s negligence may be a proximate cause.
We retain the right experts. A forensic security consultant assesses premises security adequacy and foreseeability. A crime scene reconstructionist maps bullet trajectories and victim locations relative to property lines. A trauma psychologist documents PTSD across all surviving victims. A life-care planner builds the future-cost stream. A forensic economist reduces it to present value. These experts are the difference between a demand the insurance company takes seriously and one it ignores.
We coordinate across multiple victims. A mass shooting with eleven victims creates competing allocation interests among plaintiffs. We work with co-counsel and coordination agreements to ensure that all victims are represented fairly and that the case proceeds efficiently — whether through a global mediation structure or individual trials.
We try cases. Ralph Manginello has spent 27+ years in courtrooms, including federal court. He is a trial lawyer, not a settlement mill. The insurance company knows the difference — and the willingness to take a case to trial is exactly what makes a fair settlement possible.
For families who have lost a loved one, our wrongful death practice is built to handle the full weight of what you are facing — the legal process, the medical investigation, the insurance fight, and the personal representative appointment that opens the courthouse door.
Who We Are
Ralph P. Manginello is the Managing Partner of Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC. He has been licensed to practice law in Texas since November 6, 1998 — 27+ years of trial practice, including admission to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. He is a member of the Texas Trial Lawyers Association and the Houston Bar Association. Before he was a lawyer, he was a journalist — he knows how to find the facts, and he knows how to tell the story those facts tell to a jury. He is rated “Excellent” on Avvo with a 5.0 client-review score. He leads the active $10M+ hazing lawsuit against Pi Kappa Phi and the University of Houston — a case that shows what it looks like when a lawyer takes on an institution and does not back down. Read more about Ralph.
Lupe Peña is an Associate Attorney, licensed in Texas since December 6, 2012 — 13+ years of practice, including federal court admission. Before he joined this firm, he spent years inside a national insurance-defense firm — the rooms where adjusters and their software decided how to deny, delay, and devalue claims exactly like yours. He knows how claim valuation works from the inside — how Colossus values pain it cannot see, how reserves are set in the first 48 hours, how IME doctors are selected, and how delay tactics run the clock. Now he uses that knowledge for injured clients. He is fluent in Spanish and conducts full consultations in Spanish without an interpreter. Read more about Lupe.
Our firm has recovered more than $50,000,000 for injured clients — including a $5M+ brain-injury settlement, a $3.8M+ amputation settlement, and a $2.5M+ truck-crash recovery. Those are not promises. They are the track record of a firm that has been in this fight for more than two decades. Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes — but they tell you what kind of firm you are calling.
We charge on contingency. That means we do not get paid unless we win your case. The fee is 33.33% if the case settles before trial, and 40% if it goes to trial. You pay nothing up front. You pay nothing out of pocket. We advance the costs of investigation, expert retention, and case preparation — and we recover those costs only if we recover for you. A free consultation is exactly that — free, confidential, and without obligation.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I sue if the shooter is dead?
Yes. The shooter’s death does not close the courthouse door — it redirects the case. The shooter’s estate is legally liable for the harm he caused, and a claim against the estate preserves your judgment potential. But the estate likely has minimal assets, and most insurance policies exclude intentional acts. The real question is whether other parties — property owners, security companies, or potentially governmental entities — share legal responsibility for failing to prevent the shooting. That is the investigation that determines whether meaningful recovery is possible.
How long do I have to file a claim?
In Texas, the statute of limitations for both wrongful death and personal injury is generally two years from the date of injury or death. For the June 12, 2026 shooting, the filing deadline is approximately June 12, 2028. But the evidence that your case depends on — surveillance footage, body camera data, witness statements — is dying on a much shorter clock. Some surveillance footage overwrites in as little as 7 days. The two-year deadline is the legal limit. The evidence deadline is measured in days and weeks.
What if my loved one was killed — who can file a wrongful death claim?
Texas wrongful death law permits surviving spouses, children, and parents to bring a wrongful death claim. If the statutory beneficiaries do not file within a certain period, the estate’s personal representative may file on their behalf. The first step is having a personal representative appointed by the court — a procedural step that we handle as part of the representation. If you are a spouse, child, or parent of Edward Randall Scott, you may have standing to bring a wrongful death claim. The exact beneficiary class and the order of priority are questions we answer in the consultation.
What if I was injured but not hospitalized?
You still have a claim. The five victims who were admitted in stable condition and discharged — and anyone who was present during the shooting and suffered psychological trauma — has a potential personal injury claim. PTSD is a diagnosable, compensable injury under Texas law. The fact that you were not hospitalized does not mean you were not harmed. The psychological impact of surviving a mass shooting can be severe, long-lasting, and every bit as real as a physical injury. If you are experiencing nightmares, anxiety, flashbacks, emotional numbness, or hypervigilance after the shooting, tell your doctor — and tell us.
Can I sue the police for not catching the shooter sooner?
This is a question that requires careful, case-specific evaluation. Claims against governmental entities in Texas are subject to the Texas Tort Claims Act, which provides very limited waivers of sovereign immunity — particularly for discretionary law enforcement functions like the decision of how and when to apprehend a fugitive. The discretionary-function doctrine presents a near-insurmountable barrier in most cases. However, if a specific ministerial duty was violated — or if law enforcement undertook to warn the public and did so negligently — a theory may exist. Any governmental claim requires strict notice-of-claim compliance within short statutory deadlines. This is a theory that must be evaluated immediately by an attorney — the deadlines are shorter than the general two-year statute of limitations.
What if the shooting happened on a public street?
If the shooting occurred on a public street rather than on commercial property, the premises liability theory becomes more difficult — public streets are generally the responsibility of the government, and governmental immunity applies. But the investigation may reveal that the shooting occurred on or adjacent to commercial property — a parking lot, a business entrance, a property line — and that the property owner’s failure to provide adequate security contributed to the harm. This is why the exact location of the shooting is the single most important fact in the case, and why the investigation must begin immediately.
What if I was a witness but not physically injured?
You may still have a claim. Under Texas law, a person who was in the zone of danger during a mass shooting — who feared for their life and experienced the terror of the event — may have a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress or PTSD. The DSM-5 recognizes that witnessing a traumatic event satisfies the diagnostic threshold for PTSD exposure. If you were present during the shooting and are experiencing psychological symptoms, tell your doctor and call us. The injury is real even if there is no bullet wound.
How much does it cost to hire Attorney911?
Nothing up front. We work on contingency — we do not get paid unless we win your case. The fee is 33.33% if the case settles before trial, and 40% if it goes to trial. We advance the costs of investigation, expert retention, and case preparation. You pay nothing out of pocket. The consultation is free, confidential, and carries no obligation. You can call us at 1-888-ATTY-911 — 1-888-288-9911 — 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. You will speak to a live person on our staff, not an answering service.
Contact Us — Free, Confidential, 24/7
If you or a family member was affected by the Midland mass shooting on June 12, 2026, call us now. The consultation is free. The call is confidential. And the preservation letters that freeze the evidence go out the day you call — not next week, not after the funeral, not when the insurance company finishes its “investigation.”
Call 1-888-ATTY-911 — 1-888-288-9911 — 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
You will speak to a live person on our staff. We are not an answering service. We are the firm that picks up the phone at 2 a.m. because that is when people in crisis need to talk.
Hablamos Español. Lupe Peña conducts full consultations in Spanish without an interpreter. If your family prays in Spanish, we speak your language — and we fight in it too.
You can also contact us online or learn more about our practice areas.
The evidence is disappearing. The insurance company is already working. The clock is running. Call today — and let the work begin.
Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes. This page is legal information, not legal advice. Contacting the firm is free and confidential.