Midland, Texas Shooting: Legal Rights of Victims and Families After the June 2026 Mass Shooting
If you are reading this from a chair beside a bed at Midland Memorial Hospital, or from a kitchen table where a chair is now empty, we are writing to you. Not at you — to you. What happened on that commercial corridor west of downtown Midland on the morning of June 12, 2026, was not an act of God, and the legal system has more to offer you than the criminal case that ended when the shooter was found dead in an abandoned veterinary clinic a few hours later. One person is gone. Ten more are injured — five were discharged, four went to surgery, and as the first reports circulated, one was still in the operating suite. The man who did this is dead. The question that remains is whether anyone else is responsible, and the answer — in Texas law, in the evidence that is dying right now on the DVRs of every business along that corridor, and in the duty that commercial property owners owed the people walking past their buildings — is that someone else may well be.
We are Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC. We take catastrophic-injury and wrongful-death cases in Texas. We are writing this page as the resource we wish every family in your position had access to in the first days after a mass shooting: what the law actually says, what the evidence clock is doing right now, what the insurance companies are already doing, and what your options are when the most obvious defendant is dead. None of what follows is legal advice for your specific case — it is legal information, and contacting the firm is free and confidential. But every word of it is written from the inside of this work, by people who have done it.
What Happened in Midland on June 12, 2026
A 45-year-old man opened fire along a busy commercial corridor in Midland on a Friday morning, killing one person and wounding ten others before barricading himself in an abandoned veterinary clinic. The corridor — lined with hotels, auto-service businesses, and retail establishments a few miles west of downtown — is the kind of road that Midland’s oil-and-gas economy runs on, serving both local residents and the transient workforce that cycles through the Permian Basin. Dozens of squad cars descended on the area. A witness who works at a body shop next to the closed clinic reported hearing what sounded like at least 40 gunshots, then what sounded like a small explosion, then the sight of heavily armed officers pouring out of an armored vehicle and deploying robots into the building. Midland’s mayor confirmed that authorities used robot and drone footage to confirm the shooter was dead inside. They did not say how he died.
Midland Memorial Hospital treated eleven victims. Five were discharged. Four were taken into surgery. Three of those surgical patients were moved to recovery. One remained in the operating suite as the first reports went out. The hospital set up a blood drive at its main entrance the next day — a small, concrete act by a community that has been through this before.
The Two-Day Warning: When Foreseeability Has a Date and a Name
This is the fact that changes everything about the legal analysis. Two days before the mass shooting — on Wednesday, June 10, at 11:23 p.m. — a Midland police officer tried to stop a vehicle. The driver did not stop right away. When he finally did, he got out of the vehicle and fired rounds from a rifle at the officer. The officer returned fire. The shooter got back in the vehicle and fled. The vehicle was found abandoned a short distance away. An extensive search was conducted. The shooter was not located.
The officer was not injured. But the next day — Thursday, June 11 — Midland Police did something that matters enormously to every civil claim that may follow from Friday’s massacre:
Midland Police issued an alert Thursday that Villarreal was wanted for attempted capital murder of a peace officer.
That public alert is a legal fact, not just a news item. It means that for approximately 24 to 36 hours before the mass shooting, the public — including every business owner, hotel operator, and property manager along that commercial corridor — was on notice that an armed, dangerous individual who had already fired a rifle at a police officer was at large in Midland. When we talk about whether a property owner “knew or should have known” of an unreasonable risk of harm to people on its premises, that alert is the kind of fact that a jury is entitled to weigh.
This is not a suggestion that every business in Midland should have predicted a mass shooting. It is a statement that Texas premises liability law asks a specific question — was the criminal act foreseeable? — and that the answer to that question in this case includes a documented prior shooting, a public manhunt, and a city-wide alert, all in the same community that survived a mass shooting rampage in 2019 that killed seven people and wounded two dozen more.
The 2019 Odessa-Midland Shooting: Why Prior Violence Matters
In 2019, a gunman who had been fired from his oil-services job killed seven people and wounded approximately twenty-five while firing at random as he drove between Odessa and Midland. The two cities sit roughly 20 miles apart in the Permian Basin, sharing a regional trauma infrastructure and a history of mass-violence risk that bears directly on foreseeability analysis for premises liability claims.
That 2019 shooting is not a historical footnote. In Texas premises liability law, the question of whether a property owner owed a duty to protect invitees from foreseeable criminal acts of third parties turns on what the owner knew or should have known about the risk. A documented mass shooting in the same geographic corridor, seven years earlier, is a cornerstone foreseeability exhibit. It establishes that mass public shootings are a known risk in this area — not a freak occurrence, not an unforeseeable bolt from the blue, but a recognized danger that a jury can find a reasonable property owner should have anticipated and taken steps to guard against.
When we pair the 2019 shooting with the June 11 public police alert, the foreseeability foundation for a negligent-security claim against commercial property owners along the June 12 shooting corridor becomes substantial. The question for a jury is not whether the property owner could have predicted this specific shooter at this specific hour. The question is whether the owner took reasonable security measures — lighting, surveillance, access control, security personnel — in light of a known and documented risk of mass violence in this corridor.
Who Can Be Held Liable: Mapping Every Defendant
The shooter is dead. That does not end the search for accountability — it begins it. Here is the defendant map for a mass shooting along a commercial corridor in Midland, Texas:
The Estate of the Shooter. A direct claim for battery, assault, and wrongful death lies against the shooter’s estate. The estate is likely insolvent — most individual estates are — but the claim preserves liability and may uncover assets or insurance that are not immediately visible. A homeowner’s policy, a vehicle policy, or real property may exist. Filing the claim against the estate is a step that protects the family’s position even if the recovery is modest.
Commercial Property Owners Along the Shooting Corridor. This is where the real civil case lives. If victims were shot on or adjacent to the premises of a hotel, auto business, retail establishment, or other commercial property, Texas premises liability law may impose a duty on the owner to have taken reasonable steps to protect invitees from foreseeable criminal acts of third parties. The specific ownership and leasehold control of each parcel must be established through discovery — property records, lease agreements, and maintenance contracts. But the duty is real, and the foreseeability evidence is strong.
Hotels Along the Corridor. Hotels in Texas are held to an elevated standard of care regarding guest safety. If any victims were guests of hotels along the affected corridor — or were shot on hotel premises, in parking lots, or near entrances — the hotel’s duty to protect against foreseeable criminal violence is triggered. Hotels are required to take reasonable security measures: working locks, functional surveillance, adequate lighting, trained staff, and in some cases security personnel. A hotel that knew or should have known of the risk — given the 2019 shooting, the public police alert, and the corridor’s crime history — and failed to take those measures may be liable. Our firm’s hotel and premises liability practice handles cases involving exactly this kind of failure.
The Owner of the Abandoned Veterinary Clinic. An abandoned commercial structure that became the site of the final standoff raises questions about premises maintenance, attractive-nuisance exposure, and whether the building’s condition contributed to the danger. Liability for the civilian shootings depends on where victims were actually shot — not where the barricade occurred — but the clinic’s condition and the owner’s maintenance obligations are part of the full investigation.
The City of Midland and the Midland Police Department. The two-day gap between the Wednesday rifle attack on an officer and the Friday mass shooting raises a legitimate question: should the suspect have been apprehended before Friday? The Texas Tort Claims Act provides limited waivers of sovereign immunity for municipalities, but the discretionary-function exception substantially limits claims based on law-enforcement decisions about how to allocate manhunt resources. This theory is not dead — but it is constrained, and any claim against the City of Midland must comply with notice-of-claim requirements that are significantly shorter than the two-year statute of limitations. The specific Midland notice deadline must be confirmed with an attorney immediately, because missing it can extinguish the claim regardless of its merit.
Texas Premises Liability: The Duty to Protect Against Foreseeable Violence
Texas premises liability law requires property owners to protect invitees — customers, guests, business visitors — from foreseeable criminal acts of third parties when the owner knew or should have known of an unreasonable risk of harm. This is not a novel theory. It is settled Texas law, and it is the foundation of every negligent-security claim in the state.
The analysis proceeds in steps. First, was the injured person an invitee? People walking through a commercial corridor, shopping at businesses, staying at hotels, or going about their daily activities in a public commercial area are invitees. They are owed the highest duty of care under Texas law.
Second, was the criminal act foreseeable? Foreseeability is established through several channels: prior similar incidents on or near the property (the 2019 mass shooting), the general crime profile of the area (crime-grid data for the corridor), and specific circumstances that elevated the risk (the public police alert of an armed, dangerous suspect at large). The defense will argue that a mass shooting by a specific individual is never foreseeable. The answer is that Texas law does not require the property owner to have predicted this specific shooter — it asks whether the owner knew or should have known of an unreasonable risk of violent crime and took reasonable steps to guard against it.
Third, did the owner breach the duty? Breach analysis focuses on what security measures were present — or absent. Was there adequate lighting? Functioning surveillance cameras? Access control? Security personnel? Were there policies and procedures for responding to criminal threats? Did the business have a security plan at all? The absence of reasonable security measures, in the face of a known and documented risk of mass violence, is the breach.
Fourth, did the breach cause the harm? Causation in negligent-security cases is fought hard. The defense will argue that no amount of security would have stopped a determined mass shooter. The answer is that Texas law does not require the security to have been guaranteed to work — it asks whether reasonable security measures would have reduced the risk, and whether the absence of those measures was a proximate cause of the harm.
Governmental Immunity: The Hard Truth About Suing the Police
The two-day gap between the June 10 rifle attack on a Midland police officer and the June 12 mass shooting is the most agonizing fact in this case. A man fired a rifle at a police officer during a traffic stop. The police searched and did not find him. The police issued a public alert. And then, two days later, he opened fire on officers and bystanders along a commercial corridor, killing one and wounding ten.
The question of whether the police should have caught him is real. The legal path to holding the City of Midland or the Midland Police Department accountable for that failure is narrow. The Texas Tort Claims Act provides limited waivers of sovereign immunity for municipalities. Claims against municipalities must comply with notice-of-claim requirements that are significantly shorter than the two-year statute of limitations — the specific Midland notice deadline must be confirmed with an attorney immediately, because it can be a matter of weeks, not months. The discretionary-function exception likely shields law-enforcement decisions about how to allocate manhunt resources, how many officers to assign, and what tactics to use. These are the kind of policy judgments that governmental immunity is designed to protect.
This does not mean a governmental claim is impossible. It means it is hard, and it is subject to deadlines that are shorter than most people expect. If you are considering this theory, the time to talk to an attorney is now — not after the notice deadline has passed.
The Medicine of Gunshot Wounds: What the Victims Are Living Through
A bullet does not punch a clean hole. When a projectile traveling at supersonic speed enters the human body, it creates a temporary cavity — a sphere of stretched and torn tissue that extends far beyond the bullet’s actual path. Organs, blood vessels, and bone that the bullet never directly touched can be destroyed by the pressure wave. This is why a gunshot wound to the abdomen can shatter a femur. This is why a wound that looks small on the skin can be catastrophic inside.
The eleven victims at Midland Memorial Hospital represent the full spectrum of gunshot trauma. Five were discharged — which means their wounds, while serious enough to require hospital evaluation, were treatable without surgery. Four went to the operating room. Three of those were moved to recovery. One was still in surgery as the first reports went out. One person did not survive.
For the surgical patients, the injuries are likely multi-system. A penetrating thoracoabdominal wound can collapse a lung, lacerate the liver or spleen, perforate the bowel, and damage major blood vessels simultaneously. Vascular disruption can mean the difference between keeping a limb and losing it — and the six-hour window for restoring blood flow before tissue dies is the same clock that decides whether an amputation follows. Orthopedic devastation — shattered bones, destroyed joints — can mean permanent disability, multiple reconstructive surgeries, and a lifetime of prosthetic devices and physical therapy. A gunshot wound to the head can produce traumatic brain injury that no CT scan can fully capture — the diffuse axonal injury, the microscopic tearing of the brain’s wiring, that shows up not on film but in the personality changes, the memory loss, and the words that won’t come that a family sees across the dinner table.
And then there is the psychological trauma. A person who heard 40 gunshots, who saw people fall, who ran or hid or held a stranger’s hand while waiting for help — that person carries an injury that has a medical name, diagnostic criteria, and a documented lifetime cost. Post-traumatic stress disorder after a mass shooting is not a soft claim. It is a psychiatric injury with an eight-part diagnostic checklist, and it can last a lifetime.
Damages Under Texas Law: What Your Loss Is Worth
Texas law provides two parallel paths after a fatal injury — and understanding both is the difference between a full claim and a half claim.
Wrongful Death. Texas’s wrongful death laws allow surviving family members — a spouse, children, and parents — to recover for what they lost. That includes pecuniary loss (the financial support the person would have provided), mental anguish, loss of companionship, and funeral expenses. This claim belongs to the family, not the estate. If you lost a spouse, a child, or a parent on June 12, this is your claim. Our wrongful death practice handles these cases with the depth they require.
Survival Action. Separate from the wrongful death claim, the estate of the deceased person may bring a survival action for what the victim endured between injury and death — the pain, the suffering, the medical expenses, the terror of knowing what was happening. If there was time between the shooting and death — and in many gunshot cases, there is — this claim is real and valuable. Texas separates survival and wrongful death damages, and both must be pursued.
For the ten survivors, the damages include:
- Economic damages: hospital charges at Midland Memorial Hospital and any transfer facilities, surgical costs, future medical care, rehabilitation, prosthetic devices, lost wages, and earning-capacity impairment. These are calculable from records and expert testimony.
- Non-economic damages: physical pain and suffering, mental anguish, disfigurement, and physical impairment. These are no less real because they cannot be receipted.
- Exemplary damages: Texas permits recovery of punitive damages upon clear and convincing evidence of fraud, malice, or gross negligence. In a premises case, that means proving the defendant acted with actual awareness of the risk and conscious indifference to the consequences — a standard that, if met, can substantially increase the recovery. The statutory cap on exemplary damages is tied to the amount of economic damages plus a non-economic multiplier, and the specific formula should be confirmed with an attorney.
Case Value: The Honest Range
We are not going to tell you a number and pretend it is a promise. The honest range for this case, based on the facts as we know them, runs from approximately $500,000 on the low end to $35,000,000 on the high end. That range is extraordinarily wide because liability clarity is the gating factor.
At the low end, the shooter is deceased and likely insolvent. Crime-victims compensation through the Texas Attorney General’s Office can provide some immediate relief for medical expenses, counseling, and funeral costs, but it is capped and is not a substitute for a civil recovery. If the only viable defendant is the shooter’s estate, the recovery may be limited to whatever assets or insurance the estate holds.
At the high end, if negligent-security claims against commercial property owners along the corridor are viable — supported by the 2019 mass-shooting foreseeability baseline, the public police alert placing an armed suspect at large, and evidence of inadequate security measures — the ceiling reflects aggregated multi-victim recovery against deep-pocket premises defendants. One wrongful death and ten gunshot injuries, four of which required surgical intervention, represent catastrophic damages. A life-care planner builds the cost stream for each catastrophically injured victim — the surgeries, the rehabilitation, the prosthetic devices, the decades of medical care — and a forensic economist reduces it to present value. That is how a real number is built.
Governmental immunity likely constrains the police-failure theory. Comparative-fault exposure is minimal — the victims were bystanders in a public commercial corridor during normal daytime hours, and Texas’s modified comparative negligence rule bars recovery only if the plaintiff is more than 50% at fault, which is not a serious risk for people going about their daily lives.
Where a case falls within this range depends almost entirely on what discovery establishes: premises control, foreseeability, and breach. That is why the investigation is the case.
Evidence Preservation: What Exists, Who Holds It, How Fast It Dies
This is the section that matters most in the first days after a mass shooting. The evidence that will decide this case is dying right now — not in months, not in years, but in days and weeks.
Surveillance footage from hotels, auto businesses, and retail establishments along the shooting corridor. This is the single most important evidence in the case. It establishes where each victim was shot, the shooter’s movements, the timeline, and whether any business had functioning cameras. DVR systems typically overwrite on a 7-to-30-day loop. Every day that passes without a preservation letter, another camera may be recording over the footage of the worst day of your life. Preservation letters must go out within days — not weeks, not months.
Police body-worn camera footage from both the June 10 pursuit and the June 12 shooting response. This documents the sequence of events, the shooter’s actions, officer response, and the location and condition of victims. It is subject to Texas public-information requests but may be withheld during the active investigation. It must be requested promptly.
Robot and drone footage referenced by Mayor Lori Blong. This shows the barricade phase, the shooter’s final position, and the condition of the abandoned veterinary clinic. It is in law-enforcement custody and should be requested through public-information channels.
Midland Police Department dispatch records, 911 calls, and radio traffic from June 10 through June 12. These establish the timeline of the manhunt, the public alert, and the response. They are generally retained per department policy but should be requested promptly.
Property and leasehold records for all businesses and the abandoned veterinary clinic along the affected corridor. These identify the owners, lessees, and entities with control over the premises where victims were shot. They are public records but must be obtained before ownership transfers or entities dissolve.
Prior crime reports and security incident logs for businesses along the corridor. These establish actual notice of crime risk on or near the premises — the foundation for foreseeability and punitive-damages claims. Business records may be destroyed or purged. Litigation-hold letters are needed immediately.
Midland Memorial Hospital medical records for all victims. These document the nature and severity of gunshot wounds, surgical interventions, prognoses, and long-term care needs. They are protected by HIPAA and must be obtained through proper authorization or subpoena.
The generalist waits for the police report and then calls a lawyer. The firm that knows this work sends preservation letters to every hotel, every auto business, and every commercial property along the affected corridor within days — targeting surveillance DVRs, security protocols, prior incident reports, and lighting plans. We have written about mass shooting litigation and the evidence-preservation challenges it presents. The same principles apply here: the footage that shows what happened is being overwritten right now.
The Insurance Adjuster’s Playbook: What They Will Try
If you or a family member was shot on June 12, you may already have received a call from an insurance adjuster. It will sound friendly. It is not your friend. Here are the plays that are being run right now, and the counter to each:
Play 1: “This was an unforeseeable act of random violence.” The adjuster will argue that no property owner could have predicted a mass shooting and that the criminal act of the shooter breaks the chain of causation. The counter is the foreseeability evidence: the 2019 Odessa-Midland mass shooting, the public police alert of an armed suspect at large, and the corridor’s crime history. A jury decides whether the risk was foreseeable — not the adjuster.
Play 2: “The shooter is the only responsible party, and he’s dead.” The adjuster will try to focus all blame on the deceased shooter, arguing that the property owner’s negligence — if any — was not the proximate cause of the harm. The counter is that Texas premises liability law holds property owners independently responsible for failing to protect invitees from foreseeable criminal acts. The shooter’s culpability does not erase the property owner’s separate duty.
Play 3: “You were just a bystander in a public area — you assumed the risk.” The adjuster may argue that by being in a public commercial corridor, the victim assumed the risk of encountering criminal violence. The counter is that Texas does not apply assumption-of-risk to people going about their daily lives in a commercial area during normal daytime hours. You were an invitee. The law protected you. The property owner’s failure to provide reasonable security is not your fault.
Play 4: The fast settlement offer. A check may arrive quickly, with a release attached, before the full extent of the injuries is known — before the surgery is over, before the infection sets in, before the PTSD is diagnosed. A gunshot wound that looks like it will heal can turn into a lifetime of complications. Signing a release before the medical picture is complete is the single most common way a serious case is destroyed. Do not sign anything from an insurance company without talking to a lawyer first.
Play 5: The recorded statement. Someone friendly will call to “check on you” and ask you to “just tell us what happened” on a recording built to be quoted against you. Every word you say will be transcribed, taken out of context, and used to minimize your claim. Do not give a recorded statement to any insurance company without your lawyer present.
The First 72 Hours: What to Do Now
1. Medical first. If you or a family member was shot, the first priority is medical care — and not just the emergency care. Gunshot wounds that seem to be healing can develop infections, compartment syndrome, or delayed complications. Follow up with every specialist. Keep every appointment. The medical record is the foundation of the damages case, and gaps in treatment are the defense’s favorite argument.
2. Do not sign anything. No release, no settlement offer, no authorization for the insurance company to obtain your records, no statement — written or recorded. If someone puts a document in front of you and says “this is just a formality,” do not sign it until a lawyer has read it.
3. Do not post on social media. A photograph of you smiling at a family gathering can be used to argue you are not in pain. A post that says “I’m okay” can be used to argue your injuries are minor. The insurance company is watching your social media right now. Do not give them material.
4. Document everything. Photographs of injuries, photographs of the scene if you can safely obtain them, a written timeline of what you remember, names and contact information of witnesses, and every medical bill, prescription receipt, and appointment record. Keep a journal — not for social media, but for your lawyer.
5. Send preservation letters. If you have retained counsel, the first thing we do is send preservation letters to every hotel, auto business, and commercial property along the affected corridor, demanding that they freeze all surveillance footage, security logs, incident reports, and maintenance records. These letters must go out within days — the DVR systems are overwriting right now.
6. Contact the Texas Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund. This state program, administered by the Texas Attorney General’s Office, can provide financial assistance for medical expenses, counseling, and funeral costs for victims of violent crime. It is separate from any civil claim and has its own application process. It is not a substitute for a civil recovery, but it can provide immediate relief.
7. Call a lawyer. Not next month. Not after the medical bills pile up. Now. The evidence is dying, the deadlines are running, and the insurance companies are already working. The preservation letter that saves the surveillance footage of the worst day of your life has to go out this week.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I sue if the shooter is already dead?
Yes. A claim against the shooter’s estate survives his death. The estate is likely insolvent, but filing the claim preserves your legal position and may uncover assets or insurance that are not immediately visible. More importantly, the shooter’s death does not eliminate other defendants — commercial property owners, hotels, and businesses along the corridor may bear separate liability for failing to protect invitees from foreseeable criminal violence.
Who pays if the shooter had no money?
This is the central question, and the answer is: the property owners and businesses along the corridor who had a duty to protect the people on their premises. Texas premises liability law holds property owners responsible for failing to take reasonable security measures against foreseeable criminal acts. If a hotel, auto business, or retail establishment along the shooting corridor had inadequate security — poor lighting, no surveillance, no access control, no security personnel — and the risk was foreseeable given the 2019 mass shooting and the public police alert, that business may be liable. The business’s commercial general liability insurance is the recovery source, not the shooter’s bank account.
How long do I have to file a claim?
Texas law gives you two years from the date of the shooting — June 12, 2026 — to file a wrongful death or personal injury lawsuit. That is the general statute of limitations. But two critical deadlines are shorter: if you are considering a claim against the City of Midland or the Midland Police Department, the Texas Tort Claims Act requires a formal notice of claim that is significantly shorter than two years — the specific Midland notice deadline must be confirmed with an attorney immediately. And the evidence preservation deadline is the shortest of all: surveillance footage along the corridor is being overwritten right now, on a 7-to-30-day loop. The legal deadline and the evidence deadline are not the same. The evidence deadline is the one that matters most in the first days.
Can I sue the police for not catching him sooner?
The question is legitimate — a man fired a rifle at a police officer on Wednesday and was not apprehended before he killed someone on Friday. The legal path is narrow. The Texas Tort Claims Act provides limited waivers of sovereign immunity for municipalities, and the discretionary-function exception likely shields law-enforcement decisions about how to allocate manhunt resources. This theory is not impossible, but it is constrained, and the notice-of-claim deadline is short. If you are considering this theory, you need to talk to an attorney now — not after the notice deadline has passed.
What if I was just a bystander walking down the street?
You were an invitee. Texas law gives invitees the highest duty of care from property owners. You were in a public commercial corridor during normal daytime hours, going about your daily life. You did not assume the risk of being shot. The property owners along that corridor owed you a duty of reasonable care, and if they failed to provide adequate security against a foreseeable risk, they may be liable for what happened to you. The fact that you were “just a bystander” is not a weakness in your case — it is the reason the law protects you.
How much is a shooting case worth?
The honest range runs from approximately $500,000 to $35,000,000, depending on whether negligent-security claims against commercial property owners are viable. One wrongful death and ten gunshot injuries, four requiring surgery, represent catastrophic damages. The specific value of your case depends on the severity of your injuries, the cost of your past and future medical care, your lost wages and earning-capacity impairment, your pain and suffering, and whether punitive damages are available. A life-care planner builds the cost stream for catastrophically injured victims — the surgeries, the rehabilitation, the prosthetic devices, the decades of care — and a forensic economist reduces it to present value. That is how a real number is built. No lawyer can tell you an exact number in the first conversation, and any lawyer who does is not being honest with you.
What should I do right now to protect my rights?
Get medical care and follow up with every specialist. Do not sign anything from an insurance company. Do not give a recorded statement. Do not post on social media. Document everything — photographs, medical bills, a written timeline, witness contact information. And call a lawyer this week — not because we want to pressure you, but because the surveillance footage that shows what happened to you is being overwritten right now. The preservation letter that saves it has to go out in days.
Will I have to pay if I lose?
No. We work on contingency. We do not get paid unless we win your case. The fee is 33.33% before trial and 40% if the case goes to trial. The consultation is free. You can call us at 1-888-ATTY-911, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and you will speak to a live person — not an answering service. We will tell you honestly whether we are the right fit for your case, and if we are not, we will help you find someone who is.
Can I still get compensation if I was partly at fault?
Texas follows a modified comparative negligence rule with a 51% bar. If you are 50% or less at fault, your recovery is reduced by your percentage of fault but is not eliminated. If you are more than 50% at fault, you are barred from recovery. For victims of a mass shooting who were going about their daily lives in a commercial corridor during normal hours, comparative fault is not a serious risk. The defense may try to pin percentage points on you — every point is money — but the argument that you were at fault for being in a public area during the day is weak, and a jury is unlikely to buy it.
What about my emotional trauma — is that compensable?
Yes. Post-traumatic stress disorder after a mass shooting is a real, diagnosable psychiatric injury with an eight-part diagnostic checklist, validated clinical instruments, and a documented lifetime cost. If you heard 40 gunshots, saw people fall, ran for your life, or held someone while they bled — the nightmares, the hypervigilance, the streets you now avoid, and the way your body still jumps at a sound are not character flaws. They are symptoms. They are medical. They are compensable. We prove them the way medicine proves them — with clinical diagnosis, validated testing, and the testimony of treating clinicians — not the way a skeptic wishes we could not.
Why This Firm: Ralph Manginello and Lupe Peña
Ralph P. Manginello has spent 27-plus years in courtrooms, including federal court. He is a journalist before he was a lawyer — he learned to find the story the other side does not want told, and then he learned to tell it to a jury. He is admitted to the State Bar of Texas (Bar #24007597, licensed November 6, 1998) and the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas. He is the managing partner of this firm. He is a member of the Texas Trial Lawyers Association and the Houston Bar Association. He does not like losing.
Lupe Peña spent years inside a national insurance-defense firm — the rooms where adjusters and their software decided how to deny, delay, and devalue claims from people exactly like you. He sat in those rooms. He knows how the reserve is set in the first 48 hours, how the recorded-statement call is engineered, how the valuation software discounts pain it cannot see, and how the quick check arrives with a release printed on the back before the MRI results do. Now he sits on your side of the table. He is fluent in Spanish and conducts full client consultations in Spanish without an interpreter. If your family prays in Spanish, we serve your family fully in Spanish. Meet Lupe and Ralph — and learn why a former insurance-defense insider is the advantage you want.
We have written about mass shooting litigation and the evidence-preservation challenges it presents. The principles are the same: the footage dies, the insurance company moves fast, and the family that calls early has the strongest case.
Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes. The firm has recovered more than $50 million for injured clients over 24-plus years of practice, including a $5 million-plus brain-injury settlement, a $3.8 million-plus amputation settlement, and a $2.5 million-plus truck-crash recovery. Those numbers are the firm’s record, not a promise about your case. Your case is your case, and its value will be built from your facts.
Call Us Now
If you or a family member was shot on June 12 in Midland, or if you lost someone you love, call us at 1-888-ATTY-911 — 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. You will speak to a live person, not an answering service. The consultation is free. We do not get paid unless we win your case. Contact us or call 1-888-ATTY-911 (1-888-288-9911).
Hablamos Español.
The surveillance footage along that corridor is being overwritten right now. The preservation letter that saves it has to go out this week. Call today.