Big Spring Pedestrian Killed on FM 700 — What Happened and What Your Family Needs to Know Right Now
You are reading this because someone you love is gone. A 22-year-old woman was walking on FM 700 in Big Spring, Texas, at 6:40 in the morning, in the last minutes of pre-dawn darkness, and she did not come home. The Big Spring Police Department is still investigating. The driver walked away without a scratch. And now you are sitting at a kitchen table at 2 a.m. trying to understand what just happened to your family and what, if anything, you can do about it.
We are going to tell you the truth on this page — all of it. The law that applies. The evidence that is dying while you read this. The insurance adjuster who may already be building a narrative that blames the person who cannot speak for herself. And the fight that is available to your family under Texas law, including the honest answer to the hardest question: what happens when the person killed was walking in the roadway.
Here is the first thing you need to hear. Under Texas law, a driver does not get to hit a human being in the road and walk away from accountability simply because the person was in the lane. Texas has a specific statute that imposes a duty on every driver to exercise due care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian on a roadway. That duty does not disappear because it is dark, or because the road has no sidewalk, or because the pedestrian was walking in the wrong direction. The duty belongs to the driver. It belongs to the driver at 6:40 a.m. on FM 700 in Big Spring just as it belongs to the driver at noon on Interstate 10 in Houston.
We are Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC. Ralph Manginello has spent 27+ years in Texas courtrooms, including federal court. Lupe Peña spent years inside a national insurance-defense firm, in the rooms where adjusters and their software decided how to deny, delay, and devalue claims from people exactly like your family — and now he sits on your side of the table. We handle wrongful death claims and pedestrian and vulnerable-road-user cases across Texas. We are writing this page to give you everything we would give a family member who called us at this hour — the law, the evidence clock, the insurance playbook, the money, and the roadmap for the first 72 hours. None of it is a sales pitch. All of it is what you need to know before the adjuster calls.
The FM 700 Crash: What the Record Shows So Far
On a Thursday morning at approximately 6:40 a.m., a 22-year-old woman was struck and killed by a black 2019 Mitsubishi Outlander on West FM 700 — also known locally as Marcy — in Big Spring, Texas. She was walking eastbound in the westbound outside lane. The SUV was traveling westbound in that same lane. She was pronounced dead at the scene. The driver of the Mitsubishi was uninjured. The Big Spring Police Department’s investigation remains ongoing.
That is the public record. Here is what the public record does not yet tell you — and what the investigation may not answer unless someone is pushing for the answers.
FM 700 runs through Big Spring in Howard County, in West Texas, serving as a farm-to-market corridor that connects residential and commercial areas on the city’s western side. The Marcy designation references the Marcy neighborhood area near the FM 700 corridor. At 6:40 a.m. in mid-August in West Texas, sunrise occurs at approximately 6:50 a.m. — meaning this collision happened in the last ten minutes of pre-dawn darkness. The sun had not yet risen. The road was lit, if at all, by whatever street lighting exists on that stretch and by the headlights of the vehicles traveling it.
FM roads in this region share characteristics that matter enormously to this case. They often have narrow shoulders, limited pedestrian infrastructure — meaning no sidewalks, no crosswalks, no lighting designed for foot traffic — and speed limits in the 45 to 55 mph range in transitional zones where residential and commercial traffic mix. A person walking on FM 700 at 6:40 a.m. is not doing something exotic. They are doing what people do when a road has no sidewalk and no shoulder: they walk in the lane because there is nowhere else to walk.
The investigation is ongoing. That means the Big Spring Police Department has not yet released its final crash report, its reconstruction findings, or its determination of fault. It also means the evidence is still fresh — and it is already beginning to die.
Texas Law: The Driver’s Duty to Avoid Pedestrians
Texas law does not treat a pedestrian in the roadway as a free target. The state imposes a specific, codified duty on every person operating a motor vehicle to avoid colliding with pedestrians — and that duty applies regardless of whether the pedestrian is in a crosswalk, on a shoulder, or in the lane itself.
The governing statute is Texas Transportation Code § 552.008. This is the provision that places a duty on drivers to always exercise due care to avoid collisions with pedestrians. It requires drivers to honk their horns to warn pedestrians when necessary. It requires drivers to use proper precaution when they observe a child or any obviously confused or incapacitated person.
Texas Transportation Code § 552.008 places a duty on drivers to always exercise due care to avoid collisions with pedestrians. They must honk their horns to warn pedestrians (if necessary). They must also use “proper precaution” when they observe a child or “obviously confused or incapacitated” person.
In plain English: a driver traveling westbound on FM 700 in pre-dawn darkness has a legal duty to see what is in the road ahead and avoid it. That duty does not evaporate because the person ahead is walking rather than driving. It does not evaporate because the pedestrian is walking in the lane rather than on a nonexistent shoulder. The duty is the driver’s, and it is continuous.
Texas also has a separate speed statute that matters directly to this case. Texas Transportation Code § 545.351, titled “Maximum Speed Requirement,” requires drivers to control speed as necessary to avoid colliding with any person or vehicle on the highway. A posted speed limit is not a license to drive that speed in all conditions. Driving at or below the posted limit can still constitute an unsafe speed violation if conditions — darkness, low visibility, the foreseeable presence of pedestrians — make that speed dangerous.
Here is how these two statutes work together in this case. The driver of the Mitsubishi Outlander was traveling westbound on FM 700 at 6:40 a.m. in pre-dawn darkness. The speed limit on that stretch of FM 700 may be 45, 50, or 55 mph — the specific posted limit is a fact the police report will establish. Whatever that posted limit is, the driver had a duty under § 545.351 to control their speed so they could avoid colliding with any person on the highway. If the driver was traveling at the posted limit in pre-dawn darkness on a road where pedestrian presence is foreseeable — and a residential/commercial corridor without sidewalks is exactly where pedestrian presence is foreseeable — then the posted speed may have been unsafe for conditions.
And under § 552.008, the driver had a duty to exercise due care to avoid colliding with a pedestrian in the roadway. That means looking ahead. That means scanning the lane. That means seeing a person in the road and reacting — slowing, stopping, honking, moving over. If the driver did not see a human being in the lane ahead until impact, the question is not “why was she there?” The question is “why did the driver not see her, and could the driver have seen her if they had been exercising due care?”
A violation of a traffic statute designed to protect pedestrians could establish negligence per se in Texas if the person killed was within the class of persons the statute protects and the harm was of the type the statute was designed to prevent, and if the driver had a reasonable opportunity to perceive and react. § 552.008 is designed to protect pedestrians. A pedestrian killed by a vehicle is exactly the harm it was designed to prevent. The opportunity to perceive and react is what the investigation — and our independent reconstruction — must establish.
There is a common-law duty that runs alongside the statute. Texas common law imposes a duty on every driver to maintain a proper lookout — to actively scan the road ahead for hazards, including pedestrians, and to react to what they see. A driver who fails to maintain a proper lookout and strikes a pedestrian has committed negligence under Texas common law, independent of any statutory violation.
What the generalist misses here — and what we want your family to understand — is that the defense will try to make this case about § 552.006, the statute that tells pedestrians to use sidewalks when available and, when no sidewalk is available, to walk on the left side of the roadway facing oncoming traffic. The driver’s insurance company will point to the fact that the young woman was walking eastbound in the westbound lane — with traffic rather than against it — and argue she violated this statute. That argument is coming. It is predictable. And it is not the end of the case — it is the beginning of the comparative-fault fight, which we will walk you through next.
The Comparative-Fault Battle: The 51% Bar and Why It Is the Whole Case
Texas follows a modified comparative negligence rule with a 51% bar. What that means in plain language: a jury can assign a percentage of fault to each party. If the pedestrian is found to be 50% at fault or less, the family’s recovery is reduced by that percentage. If the pedestrian is found to be 51% at fault or more, the family recovers nothing. Zero.
This is the single most important number in the case. Every percentage point of fault assigned to the person killed is money subtracted from the family’s recovery — and if the scale tips past 50%, the case disappears entirely.
The insurance company knows this. The adjuster assigned to this crash began working to pin fault on the pedestrian from the moment the claim was opened. That is not a guess about their intentions — it is how the system works. A pedestrian walking in the roadway, in the lane, in the same direction as traffic, in pre-dawn darkness, is the easiest person in the world for an insurance adjuster to blame. The adjuster will argue she should not have been there. The adjuster will argue she should have been on the other side of the road. The adjuster will argue she was wearing dark clothing. The adjuster will argue the driver could not have seen her.
Every one of those arguments is designed to push the fault percentage above 50%. And every one of them can be fought — but only if the evidence is preserved and the case is built by someone who knows how to push the fault back onto the driver.
Here is how we fight it. The driver had a statutory duty under § 552.008 to exercise due care to avoid a pedestrian in the roadway. The driver had a statutory duty under § 545.351 to control speed for conditions — including darkness and the foreseeable presence of pedestrians. The driver had a common-law duty to maintain a proper lookout. If the driver was distracted — looking at a phone, adjusting the infotainment system, reaching for something — the driver’s share of fault goes up and the pedestrian’s goes down. If the driver was speeding in pre-dawn darkness on a road with no pedestrian infrastructure, the driver’s share goes up. If the driver’s headlights were on but the driver was not scanning the road, the driver’s share goes up.
The Texas comparative negligence framework is not a wall. It is a battleground. The family’s job — and our job — is to make sure the jury hears every fact that puts the responsibility where it belongs: on the person operating a 3,800-pound machine in the dark, not on the person walking in the only space the road gave her to walk in.
Who Can Be Liable in This Pedestrian Death
The driver of the 2019 Mitsubishi Outlander bears primary liability. The theories of negligence against the driver are these:
Failure to maintain a proper lookout. A driver traveling on FM 700 in pre-dawn darkness must scan the road ahead for hazards. A pedestrian in the lane is a hazard. If the driver did not see the pedestrian until impact, the driver failed to maintain a proper lookout — and the question becomes whether a reasonably attentive driver would have seen her in time to avoid the collision.
Excessive speed for conditions. The posted speed limit on this stretch of FM 700 is a maximum, not a mandate. Pre-dawn darkness, a road without pedestrian infrastructure, and a corridor where people walk because there is no sidewalk are all conditions that may require a speed below the posted limit. If the driver was traveling at the posted limit without adjusting for darkness, that speed may have been unsafe under § 545.351.
Violation of the statutory duty to pedestrians. Under § 552.008, the driver had a duty to exercise due care to avoid colliding with a pedestrian. A violation of this statute, if proven, could establish negligence per se — meaning the negligence is presumed as a matter of law if the driver had a reasonable opportunity to perceive and react.
Distracted driving. If cell phone records, vehicle infotainment data, or witness statements reveal that the driver was distracted at the time of impact — texting, calling, using an app, adjusting navigation — this becomes not only a powerful liability theory but a potential basis for punitive damages. Distracted driving in pre-dawn darkness on a road where pedestrians are foreseeable is not simple carelessness. It is a choice.
There are two additional layers of potential liability worth examining.
The owner of the vehicle, if different from the driver, may face a negligent-entrustment claim. Under Texas law, negligent entrustment of a vehicle generally requires proof that the owner entrusted the vehicle to the driver, the owner knew or in the exercise of ordinary care should have known that the driver was incompetent, unfit, or reckless in operating the vehicle, the driver was in fact negligent, and the driver’s negligence proximately caused the death. This theory matters because it can open a separate insurance policy or bring additional assets into the case.
The governmental entity responsible for the road — TxDOT or Howard County — may bear partial liability if the road design itself created an unreasonable risk. If this stretch of FM 700 lacks adequate lighting, lacks pedestrian warnings, or has a shoulder too narrow for safe pedestrian use in a area where pedestrian traffic is foreseeable, the road design may have contributed to this death. Claims against governmental entities in Texas are governed by the Texas Tort Claims Act, which imposes governmental immunity as a default barrier but allows specific waivers under certain conditions. Notice-of-claim deadlines for governmental claims are short — often measured in months, not years — and missing them can extinguish the claim entirely. This is a theory that must be investigated immediately or abandoned.
The Evidence Clock: What Exists, Who Holds It, and How Fast It Dies
This is the section the insurance company hopes you never read. Every piece of evidence that decides this case is on a clock. Some of it is already dying. Some of it will be legally destroyed within weeks. And the only thing that stops it is a preservation letter — a formal demand sent to the people and entities in possession of the evidence, telling them in writing to preserve it or face legal consequences for its destruction.
Here is the evidence, system by system.
The Mitsubishi Outlander’s Event Data Recorder (EDR). Modern vehicles — and a 2019 Mitsubishi Outlander is modern — contain an EDR, sometimes called a black box. The EDR records pre-crash data in the seconds before impact: vehicle speed, brake application, throttle position, steering input, and in some cases seatbelt status and airbag deployment timing. This data is the single most important piece of evidence in the case. It tells us whether the driver was speeding, whether the driver braked, when the driver braked, and how hard. It can establish — or destroy — the distracted-driving theory. A driver who never touched the brakes before hitting a pedestrian in the road was not looking at the road. The EDR data is preserved indefinitely on the module, but the vehicle itself may be repaired, sold, or scrapped within weeks if no lien claim or spoliation letter is sent. Once the vehicle is released and repaired, the data may be overwritten on the next significant event or lost entirely if the module is replaced.
The driver’s cell phone records. If the driver was texting, calling, or using an app at the time of impact, the cell phone records will show it — down to the second. This evidence supports both the distracted-driving theory of liability and the punitive-damages theory. But cell phone carriers’ retention policies typically purge detailed usage records after 90 to 180 days. After that, the data is gone. Not “hard to get” — gone. The preservation letter to the carrier must go out immediately, and in many cases a subpoena is needed to force the production of records the carrier would otherwise delete in the ordinary course of business.
The Big Spring Police Department crash investigation file. The responding officers’ observations, measurements, photographs, witness statements, and any reconstruction findings establish the factual baseline of the case. This file is active now — the investigation is ongoing — but files close and evidence is released or destroyed after the investigation concludes. The police report itself, when completed, will contain the officer’s narrative, the diagram of the scene, the identification of the parties, and potentially the officer’s opinion on fault. That opinion is not binding on a jury, but it carries weight — and if the officer’s narrative frames the collision as pedestrian fault before all evidence is gathered, the family needs an independent investigation to present the full picture.
Scene photography and lighting analysis. The conditions on FM 700 at 6:40 a.m. in mid-August must be documented at the same time of day and the same time of year. The pre-dawn light, the headlight sightlines from a westbound vehicle, the shoulder width, the absence of pedestrian infrastructure, the visibility distance — all of this is central to both the driver’s liability and any road-design claim. Conditions change with seasons. Road improvements alter the scene. If this stretch of FM 700 gets lighting installed or a shoulder widened after this crash, the scene as it existed on the morning of the collision is gone. A photographer must be sent to capture FM 700 at 6:40 a.m. under conditions as close to the morning of the crash as possible, and an accident reconstruction expert must analyze the sightlines, the speed, and the reaction time available to the driver.
The Mitsubishi’s infotainment system data. Modern vehicles store more than EDR data. The infotainment system — the navigation, media, Bluetooth, and touchscreen interface — may contain timestamps of navigation inputs, media usage, phone connections, and even voice commands that corroborate distraction or speed. This data can overwrite quickly and may require forensic extraction by a specialist with the right tools. It is volatile. It is also discoverable — but only if someone asks for it before it is gone.
The preservation letter goes out the day you call. Not the day after. Not the week after. The day you call. Every day that passes is a day the insurance company is working to control the narrative and a day the evidence is one step closer to disappearing.
The Insurance Reality: What Coverage Exists and How the Ladder Works
The driver of the Mitsubishi Outlander may carry Texas’s legal minimum liability coverage. Texas requires a minimum of $30,000 per person and $60,000 per accident in bodily injury liability coverage. That is the floor. It is also, for a wrongful death, almost certainly not enough.
A 22-year-old woman had decades of earning capacity ahead of her. The loss of that earning capacity alone — before accounting for the human losses, the mental anguish of the family, the loss of companionship, the funeral costs — can exceed the minimum policy limits many times over. One night, one life, and the minimum policy is exhausted.
But the minimum is not necessarily the ceiling. The driver may carry more than the minimum. The driver may have an umbrella policy or an excess liability policy that stacks on top of the primary coverage. The vehicle owner, if different from the driver, may have a separate policy. And if the driver was uninsured or underinsured, the victim’s own family may have uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage that can be tapped — a coverage designed precisely for this scenario, where the at-fault driver’s insurance is insufficient to compensate the loss.
Finding every layer of available coverage is half the value of the case. The car accident attorneys at our firm know how to trace the coverage, demand the policy declarations, and identify every dollar that can be reached. Lupe Peña spent years inside a national insurance-defense firm — he knows where carriers hide coverage limits, how they delay producing declarations pages, and what questions to ask that force the full picture into the open.
The insurance adjuster assigned to this claim has already begun the process of valuing it. In the first 48 hours after a fatal crash, the adjuster sets a reserve — an internal dollar figure that represents what the carrier expects to pay. That reserve is set before the family has retained counsel, before the EDR data has been downloaded, before the cell phone records have been subpoenaed, and before the full extent of the loss is known. The adjuster sets that reserve low. It is a deliberate strategy. A low reserve anchors every subsequent negotiation. The first offer the family receives will be based on that low reserve, not on the actual value of the case.
The Insurance Adjuster’s Playbook: The Plays That Are Coming and How to Counter Each One
Here are the plays the insurance company will run against your family. Each one is designed to reduce or eliminate what they pay. Each one has a counter. What you should not say to an insurance adjuster is a question we hear from every family, and the answer is the same every time: nothing, without counsel.
Play 1: The “Just Checking In” Recorded Statement Call. Within days of the crash, someone friendly will call a family member. They will say they are “just checking on the family” and ask if you would “just tell us what happened” — on a recording. The purpose is not to gather facts. The purpose is to capture statements that can be quoted later to pin fault on the pedestrian or minimize the family’s loss. The counter: do not give a recorded statement. Not now. Not ever. You have no legal obligation to give the at-fault driver’s insurance company a recorded statement. Anything you say will be transcribed, taken out of context, and used against you. Politely decline and end the call.
Play 2: The Fast Settlement Check with a Release Attached. A check may arrive quickly — sometimes within weeks of the crash — with a release form printed on the back or enclosed with it. The release, when signed, extinguishes the family’s right to seek any additional compensation from the driver or the insurance company. The check is small. The release is permanent. The counter: never sign a release, authorization, or settlement offer without having it reviewed by an attorney. The first offer is almost always a fraction of the case’s actual value. It is designed to close the file before the family understands what they have lost and what they are entitled to recover.
Play 3: The “She Was in the Road” Fault Narrative. The adjuster will frame the crash as the pedestrian’s fault from the beginning. She was in the lane. She was walking with traffic. She was not visible. This narrative is designed to push the comparative-fault percentage above 50% and zero the case under Texas’s 51% bar. The counter: independent investigation. EDR data that shows the driver’s speed and braking. Cell phone records that show distraction. Scene photography that shows the visibility conditions. A reconstruction expert who can testify about the driver’s reaction time and opportunity to avoid the collision. The fault narrative falls apart when the evidence shows the driver had the means to see and avoid a pedestrian in the road and did not.
Play 4: The Delay Aimed at the Statute of Limitations. The adjuster may be polite, responsive, and slow. Months pass. The family thinks a settlement is coming. Meanwhile, the two-year statute of limitations is running. If the deadline passes without a lawsuit being filed, the claim is gone — forever. The counter: know the deadline. Track the deadline. And file before the deadline, every time.
Play 5: The Social Media Watch. The insurance company may monitor the family’s social media accounts. Posts about the crash, photos of the family, statements about the loss — all of it can be screenshotted and used to minimize the family’s grief or suggest the loss is not as devastating as claimed. The counter: set everything to private. Do not post about the crash, the investigation, the insurance company, or the legal process. Do not discuss the case online.
Damages: What a Wrongful Death Case Is Worth and How the Number Is Built
The case value range for a pedestrian wrongful death like this one, based on the facts known so far, runs from approximately $150,000 on the low end to approximately $1,250,000 on the high end. That range is honest, and it requires explanation — because the two ends of that range represent two very different outcomes driven by two very different factual pictures.
The low end — $150,000 — reflects a scenario where the driver carries only minimum liability coverage, the comparative-fault exposure is significant, and the case settles at or near policy limits without the aggravating factors needed to push the value higher. This is the outcome the insurance company is working toward from the first day. It is not what the case is worth. It is what the insurance company wants to pay.
The high end — $1,250,000 — reflects a scenario where the driver is found predominantly at fault, where aggravating factors such as distraction, excessive speed, or impairment are proven, and where additional coverage layers are available. It reflects the full wrongful-death valuation for a 22-year-old with a long earning-capacity horizon.
Here is what goes into the number — every category, every method.
Lost earning capacity. A 22-year-old had a projected working lifetime of 40 to 45 years. The loss of earning capacity is calculated by a forensic economist who takes the decedent’s employment history, education, career trajectory, and expected wage growth and projects the lifetime earnings that were lost — reduced to present value. If she was employed, if she was in school, if she had a career path, if she had earnings history — all of it feeds the calculation. Even a young person at the beginning of her career has substantial earning capacity over four decades. This is typically the largest economic damage in a wrongful death case involving a young adult.
Loss of companionship, society, and emotional support. These are the human losses. The loss of the relationship between the decedent and her family — the companionship, the guidance, the love, the presence that is gone. In Texas, these damages are recoverable by the surviving family members — spouses, children, and parents — under the Texas Wrongful Death Act. There is no statutory cap on these damages in a non-medical-malpractice wrongful death case.
Mental anguish. The emotional suffering of the surviving family members is compensable. This is not the decedent’s pain — it is the family’s grief, and it is real, and it is recoverable.
Pre-impact terror. Under Texas law, the moments before impact — the seconds in which the pedestrian saw the vehicle approaching and understood what was about to happen — may be recoverable as conscious pain and suffering through a survival action brought by the estate. This is a damages theory that requires proof of conscious awareness before impact. It may sound difficult to prove in a case where the pedestrian was struck from behind, but the analysis depends on the specific facts — the angle of approach, the sightlines, whether the pedestrian could have seen the headlights in the moments before impact. This is a theory our team evaluates carefully.
Funeral and burial expenses. These are recoverable. They are concrete, they are documented, and they are part of the economic damage stream.
Punitive damages. Texas allows punitive damages — called exemplary damages — in cases where the plaintiff proves gross negligence by clear and convincing evidence. Gross negligence means an act or omission involving an extreme degree of risk, considering the probability and magnitude of the potential harm, of which the actor has actual, subjective awareness, and nevertheless proceeds in conscious indifference. Distracted driving at speed in pre-dawn darkness on a road with foreseeable pedestrian traffic, if proven, could meet this standard. Excessive speed in conditions that demanded reduced speed could meet this standard. Intoxication would almost certainly meet this standard. Without aggravating factors, punitive damages are speculative. With them, they become a powerful tool that shifts the entire settlement calculus.
Texas imposes a cap on punitive damages under Chapter 41 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. The cap is the greater of (a) two times the economic damages plus one times the non-economic damages up to $750,000, or (b) $200,000. But the economic and non-economic damages themselves are uncapped in a non-medical-malpractice wrongful death case. The cap touches only the punitive layer.
The number at the end of this case is built from all of this — the earning capacity, the human losses, the anguish, the funeral costs, and, if the facts support it, the punitive damages. The adjuster’s first offer will be a fraction of this number. The family’s job is to understand the full picture before responding to any offer.
The Medicine: What Happens When an SUV Strikes a Pedestrian at Speed
A 2019 Mitsubishi Outlander weighs approximately 3,400 to 3,800 pounds. A human being weighs 130 to 180 pounds. The mass ratio is roughly 20 to 1. When a vehicle of that mass strikes a pedestrian at even 45 mph — the lower end of the likely speed range on FM 700 — the physics are devastating.
The mechanism of injury in a pedestrian-versus-SUV collision differs from a pedestrian-versus-car collision in ways that matter to both the medical reality and the legal case. A sedan typically strikes a pedestrian at the knee or lower leg, throwing the person onto the hood and potentially over the roof — a trajectory known as the “wrap-and-project” mechanism. An SUV, with its higher, blunter front end, strikes the pedestrian higher on the body — the pelvis, the torso, the head — and tends to push the person forward and down rather than up and over. The result is a higher incidence of head, chest, and abdominal trauma in SUV-versus-pedestrian collisions, and a lower survival rate at any given impact speed.
At 45 to 55 mph, the forces involved exceed what the human body can withstand. The immediate causes of death in these cases are typically severe traumatic brain injury, internal hemorrhage from organ rupture, or aortic transection from the sheer deceleration force. Death at the scene — which is what happened here — means the injuries were catastrophic and immediate. The survival action for pre-death conscious pain and suffering depends on whether the decedent had any period of conscious awareness between the moment of perception and the moment of death. In a high-speed SUV-pedestrian collision, that window may be measured in fractions of a second. Whether it is sufficient to support a survival claim is a question that requires careful analysis of the specific facts and the medical evidence.
The family needs to understand one more thing about the medical reality. The defense may attempt to minimize the pre-impact terror or conscious suffering by arguing that death was instantaneous and the decedent had no awareness. This is a defense argument designed to reduce damages, not a medical certainty. The reconstruction of the final seconds — the headlights, the distance, the reaction time, the pedestrian’s likely field of vision — is what establishes whether awareness existed. This is why the scene analysis and the reconstruction are not just about liability. They are about damages too.
The Proof Story: How This Case Is Built From Day One to Resolution
Here is how a case like this is actually built — the chronological walk from the day you call to the day the case resolves.
Week One: The Preservation Letter Goes Out. The day you call our firm, a spoliation preservation letter goes to the driver and the vehicle owner, demanding that the Mitsubishi Outlander and all its data — EDR, infotainment, dashcam if equipped — be preserved and not repaired, sold, or scrapped. A separate preservation letter goes to the cell phone carrier, demanding that the driver’s usage records be retained. A public information request goes to the Big Spring Police Department for the crash report, the officer’s narrative, the scene photographs, and any witness statements. These letters create a legal duty to preserve. If evidence is destroyed after the letter is received, the consequences range from an adverse-inference instruction — where the jury is told they may assume the destroyed evidence was as bad as the plaintiff says — to sanctions and, in some cases, a separate claim for the destruction itself.
Weeks Two Through Four: The Scene and the Vehicle. A photographer is sent to FM 700 at 6:40 a.m. to capture the conditions as they existed on the morning of the crash — the light, the sightlines, the shoulder width, the absence of pedestrian infrastructure. An accident reconstruction expert is retained to analyze the sightlines, the speed, the reaction time available to the driver, and the visibility of the pedestrian under the pre-dawn conditions. The EDR data is downloaded from the Mitsubishi — if the vehicle has been preserved. If the vehicle has been released and repaired, the EDR data may be lost, which is exactly why the preservation letter went out on day one.
Months One Through Three: Discovery and Depositions. The lawsuit is filed. Written discovery goes to the driver — interrogatories, requests for production of documents, requests for admission. The driver is deposed under oath. The responding officers are deposed. The cell phone records are produced, if the preservation letter and subpoena were timely. The EDR data is analyzed by the reconstruction expert. The defense conducts its own discovery — which is why the family must be prepared, must not post on social media, and must not give recorded statements.
Months Three Through Six: The Number Is Built. A life-care planner and a forensic economist are retained to build the economic loss — the earning capacity, the funeral costs, the household services. The non-economic losses — the companionship, the anguish, the pre-impact terror — are developed through the testimony of the family and the medical evidence. The punitive damages theory, if supported by the evidence, is built through the cell phone records, the EDR data, and the driver’s deposition.
Resolution: Mediation or Trial. Most wrongful death cases resolve through mediation before trial. The settlement leverage depends entirely on the strength of the evidence — the EDR data, the cell phone records, the reconstruction, the aggravating factors. If the driver was distracted or speeding, the leverage is enormous. If the evidence is thin and the comparative-fault exposure is high, the leverage is lower. The decision to mediate or try the case is made after depositions, after discovery, and after the full picture is known. Ralph Manginello has spent 27+ years making that decision in Texas courtrooms. How long a case takes is one of the first questions families ask — and the honest answer is that a wrongful death case resolved through mediation can take six to twelve months, while a case that goes to trial can take eighteen months to two years or more.
The First 72 Hours: A Practical Roadmap for the Family
If you are reading this in the hours or days after the crash, here is what to do — and what not to do — right now.
Do not speak to the driver’s insurance company. Not on the phone. Not in writing. Not through a family member. Every word you say will be recorded, transcribed, and used to reduce the value of your claim. You have no obligation to cooperate with the at-fault driver’s insurer. If they call, say: “I am not prepared to discuss this. Please contact my attorney.” Then call us.
Do not sign anything. No authorizations. No releases. No settlement offers. No forms from the insurance company. If someone hands you a document, read nothing into it and sign nothing. Bring it to counsel. The insurance company’s first goal is to get a signature that closes the file before you understand what you have lost.
Do not post about the crash on social media. Not on Facebook. Not on Instagram. Not on X. Not anywhere. The insurance company is watching. Set your accounts to private. Tell your family to do the same. Do not post photos, tributes, or commentary about the crash, the investigation, or the driver. A tribute post can be screenshotted and used to argue the family’s grief is less severe than claimed. A commentary post can be used to argue the family is litigious or biased. Say nothing online.
Request the police report. The Big Spring Police Department’s crash report, when completed, will contain the officer’s narrative, the scene diagram, and the identification of the parties. You are entitled to a copy. The report may take weeks to complete. Request it now, and follow up.
Preserve everything you have. Any photographs, any text messages, any communication related to the crash or the days surrounding it. The decedent’s employment records, school records, medical records — all of these are needed to build the earning-capacity claim and the human-loss claim. Gather them and keep them in one place.
Contact an attorney immediately. The evidence clock is running. The EDR data is on the vehicle. The cell phone records are on the carrier’s servers. The scene is changing. The preservation letter must go out now — not next week, not after the funeral, not when you “feel ready.” The day you call is the day the evidence starts being protected. The consultation is free. The call costs nothing. And the decision to call before the evidence disappears may be the most important decision the family makes.
Begin the process of appointing a personal representative. In Texas, a wrongful death claim is brought by the surviving family members — the spouse, children, and parents. A survival claim — for the decedent’s pre-death pain and suffering, medical expenses, and funeral costs — is brought by the estate, which requires a personal representative to be appointed by the court. This is a procedural step that takes time and must be started early. We handle this process for families; it is part of the machinery of a wrongful death case.
How Fees Work: Contingency, Plainly
We handle wrongful death cases on a contingency fee. That means you pay nothing up front. You pay nothing out of pocket. We advance the costs of the case — the filing fees, the expert fees, the deposition costs, the reconstruction costs, the document production costs. Our fee is a percentage of the recovery: 33.33% if the case resolves before trial, 40% if the case goes to trial. If we do not recover anything, you owe us nothing. We do not get paid unless we win your case.
That is not a marketing line. It is the fee structure, stated plainly, so you understand exactly how it works before you make a single decision. The consultation is free. The call is free. And the decision to call before the evidence disappears may be the most important decision the family makes.
The Statute of Limitations: The Two-Year Clock
Texas imposes a two-year statute of limitations on wrongful death claims and survival actions. For wrongful death, the clock runs from the date of death. For survival actions, the same two-year period applies. This means the family has two years from the date of the crash to file a lawsuit. If the deadline passes without a filing, the claim is extinguished — permanently. No exceptions for grief. No exceptions for delay. No exceptions for not knowing.
Two years sounds like a long time. It is not. The investigation takes months. The preservation and discovery process takes months. The reconstruction takes months. The depositions take months. And if the case must be tried rather than settled, the trial setting itself may be a year or more out. A case filed on day 700 is a case filed one day too late.
There may be tolling provisions that apply to the estate’s claims — provisions that pause or extend the limitations period under certain circumstances. The current rule must be confirmed for the specific facts of this case. But the safe approach is always the same: treat the two-year deadline as absolute and act well inside it.
If the case involves a claim against a governmental entity — TxDOT or Howard County for road-design liability — the deadline may be shorter. Governmental claims in Texas are subject to notice-of-claim requirements that can be measured in months, not years. Missing the notice deadline can extinguish the governmental claim even when the two-year limitations period has not expired. This is another reason to act immediately.
The Firm: Who We Are and Why This Work Matters
Ralph Manginello has been a licensed Texas attorney since November 6, 1998 — 27+ years of trial practice, including admission to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. He was a journalist before he was a lawyer, which means he learned to find the truth before he learned to argue it. He is a competitor who hates losing, and he has recovered millions for clients across Texas, including a $5M+ brain-injury settlement, a $3.8M+ amputation settlement, and a $2.5M+ truck-crash recovery. Ralph’s background and approach are part of why families trust this firm with the most important case they will ever bring.
Lupe Peña has been a licensed Texas attorney since 2012. Before joining this firm, he worked inside a national insurance-defense firm — the rooms where adjusters and their software decide how to value, delay, and deny claims. Lupe’s insider experience means he knows the playbook the insurance company is running against your family because he used to run it. He knows how reserves are set. He knows how recorded statements are engineered. He knows how the valuation software discounts injuries it cannot see. And he knows how to use all of that knowledge for the families we represent. Lupe is fluent in Spanish — he conducts full client consultations in Spanish without an interpreter, and we serve your family fully in Spanish.
We are a contingency-fee firm. We offer a free consultation, 24/7. We have live staff — not an answering service — answering the phone at 1-888-ATTY-911 at any hour. We do not get paid unless we win your case. Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes.
The page you are reading is legal information, not legal advice. Nothing here creates an attorney-client relationship. But if you are reading this at 2 a.m. because someone you love was killed on FM 700 in Big Spring, Texas, and you need to know what to do — call us. The consultation is free. The call is confidential. And the conversation will give you more clarity than you have had since the phone rang.
Hablamos Español. Your family does not have to work through this alone, and you do not have to work through it in a language that is not yours. Lupe conducts full consultations in Spanish. Your family’s grief and your family’s rights do not change because of the language you pray in. Neither does our commitment to them.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can the family recover if the pedestrian was walking in the roadway?
Yes. Texas law requires drivers to exercise due care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian on a roadway, regardless of where the pedestrian is walking. The fact that the pedestrian was in the lane rather than on a shoulder or sidewalk does not automatically bar recovery. It may create a comparative-fault argument, but Texas follows a modified comparative negligence rule with a 51% bar — meaning the family can recover as long as the pedestrian’s share of fault does not exceed 50%. The driver’s duty to see and avoid a pedestrian in the road is independent of the pedestrian’s location in the roadway.
How long does the family have to file a wrongful death lawsuit in Texas?
Texas imposes a two-year statute of limitations on wrongful death claims, running from the date of death. The same two-year period applies to survival actions. If the claim involves a governmental entity — such as TxDOT for road-design liability — shorter notice-of-claim deadlines may apply. The safe approach is to treat the two-year deadline as absolute and act well inside it. The investigation, preservation, discovery, and reconstruction processes take months, and filing near the deadline leaves no room for error.
What evidence is most important in a pedestrian wrongful death case?
The Event Data Recorder (EDR) data from the at-fault vehicle is the single most important piece of evidence. It records the vehicle’s speed, braking, steering, and throttle position in the seconds before impact. Cell phone records can establish distracted driving. The police crash investigation file provides the factual baseline. Scene photography at the same time of day documents the visibility conditions. And the vehicle’s infotainment system may contain data corroborating distraction or speed. All of this evidence is on a clock — cell phone records are purged after 90 to 180 days, and the vehicle may be repaired or scrapped within weeks.
What if the driver was texting or using a phone when the crash happened?
If cell phone records or vehicle infotainment data show the driver was texting, calling, or using an app at the time of impact, the case transforms. Distracted driving is not just a liability theory — it is a potential basis for punitive damages under Texas law. Punitive damages require clear and convincing evidence of gross negligence, and distraction at speed in pre-dawn darkness on a road with foreseeable pedestrian traffic can meet that standard. Punitive damages shift the entire settlement calculus and give the family leverage that simple negligence does not.
Can the family sue the vehicle owner if the owner was not the driver?
Yes, under a theory of negligent entrustment. If the owner of the Mitsubishi Outlander is different from the driver, and the owner knew or should have known that the driver was incompetent, unfit, or reckless, the owner may be liable. This theory matters because it can open a separate insurance policy or bring additional assets into the case. The owner’s liability depends on what the owner knew about the driver’s fitness to operate the vehicle safely.
Is there a cap on damages in a Texas pedestrian wrongful death case?
There is no statutory cap on wrongful death or survival damages in Texas outside of medical-malpractice cases. Economic damages — lost earning capacity, funeral costs — are uncapped. Non-economic damages — loss of companionship, mental anguish — are uncapped. Punitive damages are capped under Chapter 41 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code at the greater of (a) two times economic damages plus one times non-economic damages up to $750,000, or (b) $200,000. But the economic and non-economic damages themselves have no cap.
Who can file a wrongful death claim in Texas?
Under the Texas Wrongful Death Act, surviving spouses, children, and parents of the decedent may bring a wrongful death claim. A survival action — for the decedent’s pre-death pain and suffering, medical expenses, and funeral costs — is brought by the estate, which requires a personal representative to be appointed by the court. The personal representative is the person Texas law authorizes to bring the estate’s claim. We handle the appointment process as part of building the case.
What should the family do if the insurance company calls?
Do not speak to the driver’s insurance company. Do not give a recorded statement. Do not sign anything. Do not accept a settlement offer. The insurance adjuster’s job is to minimize what the company pays, and every word the family says will be used toward that end. The family has no legal obligation to cooperate with the at-fault driver’s insurer. If the adjuster calls, say: “I am not prepared to discuss this. Please contact my attorney.” Then call us at 1-888-ATTY-911.
What is the case worth?
The case value range, based on the facts known so far, runs from approximately $150,000 to $1,250,000. The low end reflects a minimum-policy-limits settlement with significant comparative-fault exposure. The high end reflects a full wrongful-death valuation for a 22-year-old with a long earning-capacity horizon if the driver is found predominantly at fault. The actual value depends on the driver’s conduct — speed, distraction, impairment — the available insurance coverage, the comparative-fault allocation, and whether aggravating factors open the door to punitive damages. An honest evaluation requires the evidence the investigation produces, not a guess made in the first week.
How long does a wrongful death case take?
A wrongful death case resolved through mediation can take six to twelve months. A case that goes to trial can take eighteen months to two years or more. The timeline depends on the complexity of the investigation, the speed of discovery, the court’s docket, and whether the defense is willing to negotiate in good faith. The statute of limitations is two years from the date of death, and the case must be filed before that deadline regardless of where the settlement negotiations stand.
Does the family have to go to court?
Not necessarily. Most wrongful death cases resolve through mediation or settlement before trial. But the willingness to go to trial — and the preparation to win at trial — is what creates the leverage that drives a fair settlement. If the insurance company knows the family is not prepared to try the case, the settlement offer will reflect that. If the insurance company knows the family has a trial team ready, the offer changes. We prepare every case as if it will be tried, which is exactly why most of them are not.
What if the driver was uninsured or underinsured?
If the at-fault driver carried no insurance or insufficient insurance, the family may have uninsured or underinsured motorist (UM/UIM) coverage through their own auto policy or the decedent’s policy. UM/UIM coverage is designed for exactly this scenario — where the at-fault driver cannot compensate the loss. Identifying and tapping UM/UIM coverage is a critical step that many families do not know about. We trace every available policy, including the family’s own coverage, to make sure every dollar that can be reached is reached.
If you are reading this page because someone you love was killed on FM 700 in Big Spring, Texas — call us. 1-888-ATTY-911. The consultation is free. The call is confidential. There is no fee unless we win your case. And the evidence that decides your family’s case is dying while you read this. The preservation letter goes out the day you call.
Contact us — 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Hablamos Español.