Midland, Texas Shooting: Legal Rights After the Loop 250 Tragedy
If you are reading this in the hours or days after the shooting near Loop 250 in Midland, you are probably in one of three places: a hospital room at Midland Memorial, a kitchen table where someone’s chair is now empty, or a phone screen at 2 a.m. trying to understand whether anything can be done when the man who pulled the trigger is already dead. We are going to tell you the truth about that, and the truth is more complicated than what you have heard on the news. The shooter’s death closed one door. It did not close all of them.
What happened on that Friday morning in Midland was not an act of God, and it was not a random bolt of violence that no one could have prevented. A fugitive wanted for attempted capital murder of a police officer — a man law enforcement had been hunting for over thirty hours — opened fire on passing cars, bystanders, and officers near the Victorian Inn before barricading himself inside an abandoned veterinary clinic. He killed one person and injured ten others. Two of the injured were still in critical condition as of Saturday. The man was found dead inside the building from a self-inflicted gunshot wound. But before he ended his own life, he used that building as a fortress — a fortified position from which to fire on the public on a busy commercial corridor in a West Texas oil town.
This page is about what the law allows when the person who caused the harm is gone. It is about who else bears responsibility for what happened — and under Texas law, that question turns on whether the owner of that abandoned building let it sit unsecured in a way that was foreseeable, preventable, and dangerous. We are Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm. We handle shooting, negligent security, and wrongful death cases in Texas. This is what we need you to know.
What Happened in Midland on June 12, 2026
The facts as publicly reported are these. A 45-year-old fugitive from Odessa had been wanted by law enforcement since Wednesday, when he led police on a high-speed chase, exited his vehicle, and fired a rifle at an officer during the pursuit. Texas DPS, Midland Police, Texas Rangers, and US Marshals began an intensive manhunt. Wanted posters named him in connection with the attempted capital murder of a police officer.
On Friday morning, his cell phone — which he had apparently turned off to avoid tracking — began sending signals again in the area of the Victorian Inn near Loop 250. When Midland police officers heard gunfire coming from a building around 8 a.m., they responded. The shooter fired at officers, at passing cars, and at bystanders. A manager at All American Collision nearby described seeing a man randomly shooting at cars driving by. Her business went on lockdown. A semitruck driver voluntarily blocked an offramp on Loop 250 to keep people away from the gunfire. A SWAT vehicle broke through a fence. Approximately twenty SWAT officers ran into the building. After a standoff, officers found the suspect dead inside the building at around 12:30 p.m.
Nine victims were transported to Midland Memorial Hospital. Five were discharged by Friday afternoon. Four remained hospitalized on Saturday — two in critical condition and two in fair condition.
The person killed was a 62-year-old City of Midland employee who worked in the solid waste department. He was a member of the local softball community, a husband, a father, and what the city called “a good person all the way around.” The city’s own words were: “Behind every employee badge is a husband or wife, a mother or father, a son or daughter, a friend, a teammate, and a person whose life touched countless others.”
That is the picture of what happened. The legal picture is something else, and it begins with a question that most people in Midland have not yet thought to ask: who owned that abandoned veterinary clinic, and why was its door open?
Why the Shooter’s Death Does Not Close the Door on Accountability
When the person who caused the harm is dead, most people assume the legal case dies with him. That is wrong — but the path forward changes. You cannot sue a dead man and expect to collect from his paycheck. What you can do is ask the harder question: who created the conditions that made this possible?
The shooter chose to pull the trigger. He is morally and legally responsible for every bullet he fired. But he did not build that abandoned veterinary clinic. He did not leave its doors unsecured. He did not decide that a vacant commercial building on a busy commercial corridor in an active manhunt zone would sit open and accessible to anyone who walked in — including a fugitive with a rifle looking for a place to make a stand.
Texas law recognizes a category of civil liability called premises liability, and it applies to property owners who know, or should know, that their unsecured property creates an unreasonable risk of harm to the public. An abandoned commercial building in a busy area is not just an eyesore. It is a foreseeable haven for criminal occupation. And when a fugitive uses that building as a shooting platform, the question of whether the owner should have secured it becomes a question a jury may answer.
This is not a theory we invented. It is the same legal framework that has been used in mass shooting cases across the country — cases where a property owner’s failure to secure a building or venue enabled a shooter to carry out an attack from a fortified position. The legal principle is the same. The facts are Midland’s own.
The Abandoned Building: Premises Liability Under Texas Law
Texas premises law is built on a deceptively simple idea: a landowner owes a duty to people who come onto the property, and the duty’s strength depends on why the person is there. But there is a second duty that applies here — the duty to protect people off the property from foreseeable criminal acts that originate on the property.
Texas premises law imposes on landowners a duty to protect against foreseeable third-party criminal acts when the owner knows or has reason to know of an unreasonable risk of harm.
That sentence is the spine of this case. The question is whether the owner of the abandoned veterinary clinic knew, or had reason to know, that leaving the building unsecured created an unreasonable risk. And in Midland, Texas — a Permian Basin oil town where boom-bust economic cycles leave commercial buildings vacant for years, where law enforcement has long flagged unsecured vacant structures as a known haven for transient occupation and fugitive sheltering — that argument is not a stretch.
Here is what we would need to find to build this case:
The ownership chain. Who owns the building? Property records in Midland County will identify the legal owner — whether it is an individual, an LLC, a corporate entity, or a bank that foreclosed. The owner of record is the starting defendant. But ownership can be layered: a property company that owns the dirt, a management company that was supposed to maintain it, a bank that holds the note. Each layer is a potential source of accountability, and each layer may carry its own insurance.
The vacancy duration. How long was this building abandoned? A building that went vacant two months ago is a different case from one that has been sitting open for two years. The longer the vacancy, the stronger the argument that the owner had constructive notice of the risk — and the more likely that prior complaints, code violations, or police calls to the property establish a pattern the owner was on notice of and ignored.
Prior code violations. Midland’s municipal code, like most Texas cities, has provisions for vacant building registration, securing of abandoned structures, and property maintenance standards. If the city cited this property before — for an unsecured door, a broken fence, a missing lock, a code violation that was never fixed — that citation is written proof that the owner knew the building was a problem and chose not to fix it. We need to obtain those records before they are archived or purged.
The securing history. Was the building ever boarded? Was it ever locked? Were there “no trespassing” signs? Was there a security patrol? The absence of every one of these measures is a fact that helps build the foreseeability argument. An abandoned commercial building that sits wide open on a busy corridor near motels and collision shops is not a mystery waiting to happen. It is an invitation.
The manhunt context. This may be the single most powerful fact in the case. Law enforcement had been publicly searching for this fugitive for over thirty hours. The manhunt was on the news. The area near the Victorian Inn was within the zone of the search. If the building owner — or any nearby property owner — was aware of the active manhunt and did nothing to secure their property, that awareness strengthens the foreseeability argument dramatically. A vacant building is always a risk. A vacant building during a published manhunt for an armed fugitive in the immediate vicinity is a foreseeable disaster.
This is the theory that can reach a defendant with assets and insurance, even though the shooter is dead. It is not easy. It requires discovery, expert testimony, and a trial lawyer who knows how to build a premises case in a conservative West Texas jurisdiction. But it is real, and it is the path that can produce a recovery that actually pays for what was lost.
If you want to understand more about how premises liability works in Texas — including the duty a property owner owes and what happens when that duty is breached — that resource goes deeper into the doctrine.
Negligent Security: When Property Owners Share Responsibility
Beyond the abandoned clinic itself, there is a related theory: negligent security. If the shooter occupied or staged from the Victorian Inn or any adjacent commercial property before opening fire, and that property lacked adequate security measures — lighting, surveillance, access control, on-site staff — during a known, publicized manhunt in the immediate area, the owner of that property may also bear responsibility.
Negligent security is not a different cause of action from premises liability — it is the application of premises liability to the specific failure to protect against foreseeable criminal acts. The question is always the same: did the property owner know, or should it have known, that crime was a foreseeable risk, and did it take reasonable steps to guard against it?
In a manhunt context, the foreseeability argument is at its strongest. When law enforcement is publicly searching for an armed fugitive in a specific area, every property owner in that area is on notice that the risk of criminal activity — including violent criminal activity — is elevated. A motel that did not increase security, did not warn guests, did not lock down common areas, or did not coordinate with law enforcement during a published manhunt may have failed a duty of reasonable care.
We would need to examine:
The Victorian Inn’s security posture. Was there on-site security? Were cameras operational? Were they monitored? Were guests warned of the manhunt? Was access to the property controlled in any way during the thirty hours the fugitive was at large?
Surveillance footage from all nearby businesses. The All American Collision shop, the Loop 250 Collision Center, and any other commercial property in the area may have cameras that captured the shooter’s movements, his entry into the abandoned clinic, and the duration of his occupation. That footage establishes the timeline and the premises theory — but it is dying on a clock we discuss below.
Police call-for-service history. If police had been called to the Victorian Inn or the abandoned clinic before — for trespassing, for drug activity, for vagrancy, for any criminal complaint — that history is the foreseeability backbone of a negligent security claim. It is also public record, obtainable through a public-records request, but retention varies by agency and some records are purged within a few years.
Workers’ Compensation for On-the-Job Shooting Victims
The person killed in this shooting was a City of Midland employee. If he was on duty — performing his work for the solid waste department at the time he was shot — his family has a statutory remedy that is entirely separate from any civil lawsuit against the property owner: workers’ compensation death benefits under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act.
This is a critical fork in the road that the family of a worker killed on the job often does not know about. Workers’ compensation is a no-fault system. The family does not have to prove the city was negligent. They do not have to prove the shooting was foreseeable. They only have to show that the death arose in the course and scope of employment. If Ed Scott was on duty — driving a route, performing city work, on the clock — when he was shot, his dependents are entitled to death benefits.
But workers’ compensation is also a capped system. It pays a statutory benefit — a percentage of the worker’s average weekly wage, subject to a maximum — and it bars the family from suing the employer (the City of Midland) directly for negligence. The city’s sovereign immunity under the Texas Tort Claims Act further limits direct tort claims against the municipality for law-enforcement response decisions.
What workers’ compensation does NOT do is bar the family from pursuing a third-party claim against a negligent property owner. This is the fork: the family can collect workers’ compensation death benefits from the city AND pursue a wrongful death claim against the owner of the abandoned veterinary clinic. The two lanes run in parallel. The comp lane is faster and guaranteed but capped. The tort lane is slower and uncertain but potentially much larger. A family that takes the comp check and never explores the third-party claim is leaving money — potentially significant money — on the table.
This is the kind of decision that should never be made without understanding both options. Workers’ compensation death benefits are an important, immediate resource. But they are a floor, not a ceiling, when a third party’s negligence contributed to the death.
Texas Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund: Immediate Help Available
There is a third source of recovery that does not depend on filing a lawsuit at all: the Texas Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund, administered by the Office of the Attorney General of Texas.
This fund exists to help victims of violent crime and their families with the out-of-pocket costs that follow an act of violence — medical expenses, lost wages, counseling, and funeral costs. It is available to victims regardless of whether they pursue civil litigation. It is available to the injured and to the families of the killed. It is a no-cost resource, and it can provide meaningful help while the longer, harder work of a civil case is evaluated.
If you are reading this and you or a family member was injured in the Loop 250 shooting — or if you are a family member of the person who was killed — you should know that this fund exists and that you can apply. The application is through the OAG’s Crime Victims’ Compensation program. You do not need a lawyer to apply, but a lawyer can help you understand how the fund interacts with other potential sources of recovery so that accepting a fund benefit does not inadvertently limit a later civil claim.
The Injuries: Gunshot Wounds and the Long Road After
The medical reality of a mass shooting is not a single moment of harm. It is the beginning of a trajectory that can last months, years, or a lifetime, depending on where the bullet went and what it destroyed on the way through.
Ten people were injured. Two were in critical condition at Midland Memorial Hospital as of Saturday. Five were discharged. Four remained hospitalized. Those are numbers. The human reality behind each number is different.
Gunshot wound mechanics. A bullet does not just make a hole. It creates a permanent cavity — the tissue it crushes as it passes through — and a temporary cavity, a stretch effect that can damage tissue well beyond the bullet’s path. A rifle round, which the shooter used during the Wednesday chase, is particularly devastating: higher velocity means more energy transfer, more tissue disruption, more damage to blood vessels, nerves, bone, and organs. A rifle wound to the torso can perforate bowel, liver, spleen, or major vessels. A wound to the extremity can shatter bone and sever arteries. The injury pattern determines the surgical course, the recovery timeline, and the lifetime cost.
The two in critical condition. When a shooting victim is listed as critical, it means they are in an ICU, likely on a ventilator, likely with monitoring lines in place, likely facing one or more operations — and possibly facing the possibility that they will not survive. ICU care for a gunshot victim can cost tens of thousands of dollars per day. The hospital bill alone, before a single day of rehab, can exceed the annual income of most Midland families.
The five discharged — and the delayed injuries they may face. Being discharged from the emergency department does not mean being healed. Gunshot wound patients who are sent home with a wound, with stitches, with a prescription for antibiotics, and with a follow-up appointment are sent home with the beginning of a medical journey, not the end of one. Infection is a risk for weeks. Nerve damage may not declare itself until the swelling subsides. Post-traumatic stress disorder — nightmares, hypervigilance, panic, the inability to drive past the spot where the bullets came through the windshield — can surface within days or weeks and can persist for months or years if untreated. A person who “walked away” from a shooting is not necessarily a person who is okay.
PTSD and psychological injury. The psychiatric injury caused by being shot at — or by witnessing a mass shooting — is real, diagnosable, and compensable under Texas law. Post-traumatic stress disorder is a formal diagnosis with specific clinical criteria. It is not a mood. It is not a choice. It is not “being dramatic.” For some victims of the Loop 250 shooting, the psychological injury will be the most disabling and longest-lasting harm they carry. The person who flinches every time a car backfires, who cannot return to the route they were driving when the bullets hit, who cannot sleep without seeing the muzzle flash — that person has a compensable injury, and the law recognizes it.
Evidence Preservation: Why Time Is Not on Your Side
Everything we have discussed — the premises liability theory, the negligent security theory, the workers’ compensation claim, the civil case — depends on evidence. And the evidence in this case is already disappearing.
Surveillance footage from nearby businesses. The Victorian Inn, All American Collision, Loop 250 Collision Center, and any other commercial property near the shooting may have cameras that captured the shooter’s movements, his entry into the abandoned clinic, the duration of his occupation, and the conditions at the scene. Commercial CCTV systems typically overwrite on a 7-to-30-day cycle. The footage from the day of the shooting — June 12 — is already at risk. Every day that passes without a preservation demand is a day closer to that footage being recorded over. This is the single most time-critical evidence in the case.
The building itself. The abandoned veterinary clinic is a crime scene and an evidence site. Its condition — whether doors were locked, whether boarding was present, whether access was open — is the heart of the premises liability case. But the building can be remediated, secured, or demolished. Once the scene is altered, the proof of its condition at the time of the shooting may be gone. A preservation letter must demand that the building and its access points be left untouched.
Midland Police body-worn camera and dashcam footage. Officers responded to the shooting, and the Wednesday chase was also captured. Body-worn camera footage from the Friday standoff documents the conditions at the scene — including the condition of the building. This footage is subject to the Texas Public Information Act but may be restricted during an ongoing investigation. A formal request must be submitted promptly, and the FBI’s involvement means some records may be controlled by federal authorities.
Cell phone signal data and tracker logs. The cell phone signals that led police to the Victorian Inn area on Friday morning also establish the shooter’s movements during the thirty-hour manhunt — including how long he may have been in the abandoned building. This data is controlled by the FBI and US Marshals. Civil counsel should seek preservation letters promptly to ensure this data is retained.
Medical records. The medical records of all surviving victims from Midland Memorial Hospital document injury severity, treatment course, prognosis, and future medical needs. These records are essential for damages quantification and life-care planning for the critical patients. They should be obtained through HIPAA-compliant authorizations before any hospital record-retention purges occur.
Vacant building access records and code violations. Property ownership records are durable, but prior city code-enforcement citations, neighbor complaints, and building-inspection records for the abandoned clinic may be archived or purged. These records establish the owner’s knowledge of the unsecured condition and the foreseeability of criminal occupation. They should be obtained immediately.
The shooter’s estate. Estate proceedings may be opened in Ector County (Odessa, where the shooter resided) or Midland County. If the estate has any recoverable assets — vehicles, real property, bank accounts — they must be identified before the estate is closed and the assets distributed. Estate proceedings can move quickly, and a failure to monitor may mean the opportunity to identify assets is lost.
The preservation letter — a formal written demand that evidence be saved and not destroyed — is the tool that freezes these records before they disappear. This is one of the first things we do when we take a case. The day you call is the day the clock starts working for you instead of against you.
The Insurance Reality: Who Pays When the Shooter Is Dead
This is the hardest conversation, and it is the one most lawyers will not have with you honestly.
The shooter is dead. His estate, based on what is publicly known, likely has negligible assets. A civil judgment against his estate for assault, battery, and wrongful death would be valid — but collecting on it would be like reaching into an empty pocket. You can sue a dead man’s estate, but you cannot make a broke estate pay.
The City of Midland, as the employer of the victim who was killed, is a source of workers’ compensation death benefits. But the city’s sovereign immunity under the Texas Tort Claims Act limits direct tort claims against the municipality for law-enforcement response decisions. The Act waives sovereign immunity only in narrow circumstances and requires strict notice compliance, and claims against the city for discretionary law-enforcement decisions face near-insurmountable barriers under the discretionary-function exception.
That leaves the premises defendants — the owner of the abandoned veterinary clinic, and potentially the owner of the Victorian Inn or adjacent properties. These are the only viable civil deep-pocket defendants. The question is whether they have insurance and assets.
A commercial property owner may carry commercial general liability (CGL) insurance. If the building owner has a standard CGL policy with adequate limits, and if premises liability is established, that insurance is the source of recovery. But vacant buildings often have reduced or lapsed coverage. A building that has been abandoned for years may have no active insurance at all, or a policy with exclusions for vacant or unoccupied properties. If the building is underinsured or owned by a thin entity with no assets behind it, the civil recovery may be limited.
This is why the honest answer to “what is this case worth” depends entirely on what discovery reveals about the building owner’s knowledge and insurance. We do not know yet. We cannot know until we pull the records, trace the ownership, and confirm the coverage. And we will not promise you a number we cannot stand behind.
What we can tell you is this: the damages in this case are catastrophic. One wrongful death and ten injuries, including two critical, would support eight-figure exposure against a deep-pocket defendant in a vacuum. The Texas Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund provides a supplemental source of recovery for victims and families regardless of civil litigation. Workers’ compensation death benefits provide a guaranteed but capped floor for the family of the employee killed on the job. The civil case — if the building owner has coverage — is where the full measure of justice lives. If it does not, we will tell you that honestly and help you access every other source of recovery available.
The Insurance Adjuster’s Playbook — and How to Counter It
If you or a family member was injured in this shooting, you may already have heard from an insurance adjuster. If you have not, you will. Here is what to expect and how to protect yourself.
Play 1: The friendly “just checking in” call. Within days of a mass-casualty event, an adjuster may call to “check on you” and ask you to “just tell us what happened” — on a recording. This call is not a welfare check. It is a recorded statement engineered to get you to say things that can be used later to minimize your claim. You may be asked leading questions: “You’re feeling okay, right?” “You didn’t see where the shots came from?” “You were just driving by, not really involved?” Every answer you give is being transcribed for use against you. The counter: do not give a recorded statement to any insurance company without your own lawyer on the line. You have no obligation to do so. Say, “I will have my attorney contact you,” and hang up.
Play 2: The fast settlement check. A check may arrive quickly — sometimes within weeks — with a release attached. The release is a legal document that, once signed, gives up your right to pursue any further compensation. The check may seem like a lot of money in the moment. It is almost always a fraction of what the case is worth — especially when the full medical picture has not yet declared itself. A person discharged from the ER who later develops infection, nerve damage, or PTSD has medical needs that the fast check will not cover. The counter: never sign a release without having a lawyer review it. Never accept a check that comes with a release. The first offer is the insurance company’s opening bid, not your case’s value.
Play 3: “The criminal act was unforeseeable.” The property owner’s insurance company will argue that the shooting was a random, unforeseeable act of criminal violence that the owner could not have predicted or prevented. This is the primary defense in a premises liability case. The counter is the foreseeability evidence: the duration of the vacancy, prior code violations, the known manhunt in the area, the industry standards for securing vacant commercial buildings. A vacant building left open during a published manhunt for an armed fugitive is not an unforeseeable event. It is a foreseeable disaster.
Play 4: “Your injuries aren’t that serious.” For victims who were discharged from the ER, the adjuster will argue that the injuries were minor — a few stitches, a graze, a “soft tissue” injury. The counter is the medical record built over time: the delayed infection, the nerve damage, the PTSD diagnosis, the neuropsychological testing, the treatment plan from a treating physician. The full medical picture takes weeks or months to develop. The adjuster’s first read is premature by design.
Play 5: The “you assumed the risk” argument. In some premises cases, the defense will argue that the victim was in an area they should not have been, or that they voluntarily exposed themselves to danger. This is a particularly offensive defense in a mass shooting where victims were driving on a public road or standing in a public commercial area. The counter is simple: driving on Loop 250 at 8 a.m. on a Friday is not assuming the risk of being shot by a fugitive in an abandoned building. Texas follows a modified comparative negligence rule with a 51% bar, meaning your recovery is reduced by your percentage of fault but barred only if you are more than 50% at fault. A person driving on a public road who is shot by a stranger is not at fault.
Texas Law: Your Rights, Your Deadlines, Your Options
Texas law gives you tools, but it also sets deadlines that are unforgiving. Here is the framework you need to understand.
The statute of limitations. Texas generally requires that a wrongful death or personal injury lawsuit be filed within two years of the date of injury or death. For the Midland shooting, that clock started on June 12, 2026. Two years sounds like a long time, but it is not — especially when evidence is disappearing on a 30-day cycle and when the investigation of a premises defendant’s ownership and insurance takes months of discovery before a lawsuit is even filed. The day you call is the day the clock starts working for you instead of against you.
The Texas Tort Claims Act. If any claim is pursued against a governmental entity — the City of Midland, for example — the Texas Tort Claims Act requires strict notice compliance, generally within six months of the incident. The Act waives sovereign immunity only in narrow circumstances, and claims for discretionary law-enforcement decisions face substantial barriers. Any notice of claim against a governmental defendant must be prepared and served with precision; a missed deadline or a defective notice can extinguish the claim entirely.
Who can bring a wrongful death claim. Texas’s Wrongful Death Act allows the surviving spouse, children, and parents of a deceased person to bring a wrongful death claim. If none of these beneficiaries file a claim within three months of the death, the executor or administrator of the estate may file the claim on behalf of the beneficiaries — unless the beneficiaries direct the executor not to. A personal representative must be appointed by the court, and we handle that appointment.
Survival actions. In addition to the wrongful death claim (which belongs to the family), Texas law provides a survival action (which belongs to the estate). The survival action allows the estate to recover for the decedent’s pre-death pain and suffering — the conscious agony between the injury and death — as well as any medical expenses incurred before death. The survival action is a separate claim from the wrongful death claim and must be properly pleaded.
Punitive damages. Texas allows punitive (exemplary) damages for gross negligence or intentional conduct. Punitive damages are theoretically available against the shooter’s estate for the intentional criminal conduct, and potentially against premises defendants if gross negligence is proven — for example, if the building owner had actual knowledge of the unsecured condition and the manhunt and did nothing. However, the shooter’s estate likely has negligible assets, making the premises defendants the practical punitive target if a gross-negligence theory is supportable. Texas caps punitive damages under a statutory formula tied to the amount of economic and non-economic damages, and the specific cap should be confirmed against the current Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code before any demand is structured.
No statutory caps on non-economic damages in general personal injury or wrongful death cases. Unlike medical malpractice cases, which are subject to non-economic damage caps, general personal injury and wrongful death cases in Texas do not have statutory caps on non-economic damages. This means the full measure of human loss — pain, suffering, mental anguish, loss of companionship — is recoverable without a statutory ceiling, subject only to the proof and the jury.
How a Shooting Case Is Actually Built
Here is what the work looks like if we take a case arising from the Midland shooting. This is not a promise of a result. It is a description of the process.
Week one: preservation. The preservation letter goes out the day we are retained. It goes to the building owner, the Victorian Inn, every nearby business with cameras, the Midland Police Department, the Texas Department of Public Safety, and any other entity that holds evidence. The letter demands that all video, logs, records, and physical evidence be preserved and not destroyed. This is the letter that stops the clock on the 30-day CCTV overwrite cycle.
Weeks one through four: records and investigation. We pull property ownership records from the Midland County appraisal district and clerk’s office. We request the building’s inspection history, code violations, and any prior complaints from the City of Midland’s code enforcement division. We request police call-for-service records for the property and the surrounding area. We obtain the medical records of our clients through HIPAA-compliant authorizations. We file public-records requests for body-worn camera and dashcam footage from the Midland Police Department and Texas DPS.
Weeks four through twelve: expert evaluation. We engage a premises security expert to evaluate the building’s condition and testify about industry standards for securing vacant commercial buildings. We engage a forensic crime-scene reconstructionist to map the shooter’s firing positions relative to the building’s unsecured access points. If catastrophic injuries are involved, we engage a life-care planner to build the cost of future medical needs and a forensic economist to reduce those costs to present value.
Discovery. Once a lawsuit is filed, discovery begins. We depose the building owner under oath: when did you buy the property? When did it become vacant? What did you do to secure it? Were you aware of the manhunt? Did anyone complain about the building? Were there prior incidents? We subpoena insurance policies, maintenance records, and corporate filings. We identify the coverage tower — primary, excess, umbrella — and determine what funds are available.
The number. The demand number is built from the medical records, the life-care plan, the economic loss projection, and the human losses the family has suffered. It is not a number pulled from the air. It is the product of the evidence and the expert work, and it is the number we are prepared to take to a jury if the defendant will not meet it.
The First 72 Hours: What to Do and What to Refuse
If you or a family member was a victim of the Midland shooting, here is what the first 72 hours should look like.
Medical care first. If you were injured and have not been seen by a doctor, go now. Some gunshot injuries — especially those involving nerve damage or internal organ injury — may not produce obvious symptoms immediately. A delayed symptom is not a minor injury. Get the medical record started, follow the treatment plan, and keep every appointment. The medical record is the foundation of your case.
Do not give a recorded statement to any insurance company. You have no obligation to do so. Say, “I will have my attorney contact you,” and end the call. The adjuster is not your friend. The adjuster is a professional whose job is to minimize what the insurance company pays.
Do not sign anything. If a document arrives — a release, a settlement offer, a “medical authorization” — do not sign it without a lawyer reviewing it. A release signed in the first days after a shooting can extinguish your right to pursue full compensation for injuries that have not yet declared themselves.
Do not post on social media. Anything you post — about the shooting, about your injuries, about your emotional state, about the investigation — can be screenshotted and used by the defense. Privacy settings do not protect you from a subpoena. If you would not want a defense attorney to read it aloud in a courtroom, do not post it.
Document everything. Keep a record of every medical appointment, every prescription, every conversation with an insurance adjuster, every day of missed work, every moment of pain. Take photographs of injuries as they heal. Write down the names of witnesses. Save every receipt. The evidence you gather yourself, starting now, is evidence no one can take away.
Call a lawyer. The preservation letter goes out the day you call. The investigation starts the day you call. The clock on the evidence — the 30-day CCTV cycle, the building that can be demolished, the records that can be purged — starts working against you the moment the shooting ends. It starts working for you the moment you have someone with the training and authority to demand that the evidence be saved.
What This Case Is Worth — Honestly
We are not going to tell you a number and call it a promise. That would be dishonest, and it would violate every standard we hold ourselves to. What we can do is explain the range, the factors, and the honest limits.
The damages are catastrophic. One wrongful death and ten injuries, including two critical, represent the kind of harm that, against a deep-pocket defendant with adequate insurance, would support exposure in the range of $5 million to $20 million or more across all victims. For the family of the person killed, a wrongful death claim includes loss of earning capacity (he was a 62-year-old employed city worker), loss of care and companionship, mental anguish, and funeral expenses. For the ten injured — particularly the two in critical condition — damages include past and future medical expenses, ICU costs, rehabilitation, lost wages, physical pain, mental anguish, disfigurement, and potential long-term disability.
The collectibility is the dominant factor. The primary tortfeasor is deceased with likely negligible assets. The government defendants face sovereign immunity. The only viable civil deep-pocket theory is premises liability against the abandoned building owner. If that building owner carries standard commercial general liability insurance with adequate limits and premises liability is established, the combined value across all victims could reach the higher range. If the building is underinsured or owned by a thin entity with no assets, recovery may be largely limited to workers’ compensation death benefits for the employee’s family, Crime Victims’ Compensation for the injured, and nominal estate claims.
The honest range:
- If the building owner has adequate insurance and premises liability is established: the combined civil recovery across all victims could potentially reach $5 million to $20 million.
- If the building owner is underinsured or the premises theory fails: recovery may be limited to workers’ compensation death benefits (for the employee’s family), Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund awards (for all victims), and any available insurance through the Victorian Inn or other adjacent properties.
Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes. The range above is an honest assessment based on the known facts and the legal landscape, not a prediction.
How Attorney911 Evaluates Shooting and Negligent Security Cases
We evaluate every shooting case the same way: we start with the evidence, we follow it to the money, and we tell you the truth about what we find.
When Ralph Manginello evaluates a case like this, he brings 27+ years of trial experience — including federal court — to the question of whether the premises theory is viable. Ralph was a journalist before he was a lawyer. He knows how to find the story the evidence tells, and he knows how to tell it to a jury. He has spent his career in courtrooms, and he approaches a case like the Midland shooting the way he approaches every case: by asking who knew what, when they knew it, and what they did or failed to do about it.
When Lupe Peña evaluates the insurance side, he brings something most plaintiff’s lawyers cannot. Lupe spent years inside a national insurance-defense firm — the rooms where claims are valued, reserves are set, and denial strategies are built. He has seen the inside of the machine. He knows how adjusters decide what a claim is worth, how they use valuation software to discount injuries they cannot see, and how they engineer delays aimed at the statute of limitations. He uses that knowledge for injured people now. And he does it in English or in Spanish, without an interpreter, because he is fluent in both.
We do not take every case. If we evaluate your situation and determine that there is no viable path to a meaningful recovery — because the building owner has no insurance, because the government defendant is immune, because the evidence is gone — we will tell you that honestly. We will also tell you what other resources are available: the Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund, workers’ compensation benefits, and any other avenue that may help. If we are not the right fit for your case, we will tell you. And if we are, we will tell you exactly what we plan to do, how we plan to do it, and what it will cost.
The cost is contingency. We do not get paid unless we win your case. The consultation is free. The first call costs you nothing.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I sue if the shooter is already dead?
Yes. The shooter’s estate can be named in a wrongful death or personal injury lawsuit, though collecting from the estate depends on whether it has assets. More importantly, the shooter’s death does not foreclose claims against other parties whose negligence contributed to the harm — including the owner of the abandoned building the shooter used as a fortified position.
How long do I have to file a lawsuit?
Texas generally requires that wrongful death and personal injury claims be filed within two years of the date of injury or death. For the Midland shooting, that deadline runs from June 12, 2026. However, if any claim is pursued against a governmental entity, the Texas Tort Claims Act requires notice to be given much sooner — generally within six months. Evidence is also disappearing on a much shorter cycle, so the practical deadline to act is measured in days, not years.
What if the building owner says the shooting was unforeseeable?
This is the primary defense in a premises liability case, and it is the fight we prepare for from day one. The foreseeability argument is built from the facts: how long the building was vacant, whether it was secured, whether there were prior code violations or complaints, whether the owner was aware of the active manhunt in the area, and what industry standards require for securing vacant commercial buildings. A vacant building left open during a published manhunt for an armed fugitive is not an unforeseeable event.
Was the City of Midland employee’s family entitled to workers’ compensation?
If the employee was acting in the course and scope of his employment at the time he was shot, his dependents are entitled to death benefits under the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act. This is a no-fault, statutory remedy that is independent of any third-party tort claim against a negligent property owner. The family can collect workers’ compensation death benefits AND pursue a civil claim against the building owner.
What is the Texas Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund and how do I apply?
The Texas Crime Victims’ Compensation Fund, administered by the Office of the Attorney General, provides financial assistance to victims of violent crime and their families for medical expenses, lost wages, counseling, and funeral costs. It is available regardless of whether you pursue civil litigation. You can apply through the OAG’s Crime Victims’ Compensation program, and a lawyer can help you understand how the fund interacts with other potential sources of recovery.
What if I was discharged from the hospital — is my case still worth pursuing?
Yes. Being discharged from the emergency department does not mean your injuries are minor or resolved. Gunshot wound patients can develop infections, nerve damage, and post-traumatic stress disorder after discharge. The full medical picture may take weeks or months to develop. Do not accept a settlement offer or sign a release before the full extent of your injuries is known.
Will I have to go to court?
Most personal injury and wrongful death cases settle before trial, but we prepare every case as if it will go to trial. The strength of a case is what drives settlement — a defendant and its insurance company will not pay full value unless they believe you are prepared and able to take the case to a jury. We are a trial firm, and our willingness to go to court is what gives your case its leverage.
What does it cost to hire Attorney911?
We work on contingency. We do not get paid unless we win your case. The fee is 33.33% of the recovery before trial and 40% if the case goes to trial. The consultation is free. The first call costs you nothing. We serve families in English and in Spanish.
You Do Not Have to Face This Alone
The shooting near Loop 250 in Midland took a life, injured ten people, and left a community shaken. The person who pulled the trigger is dead. But the question of who enabled him — who left a building unsecured, who failed to act during a manhunt, who created the conditions that turned a vacant veterinary clinic into a sniper’s nest — is still open. Texas law gives you the right to ask that question, and we can help you ask it.
If you or a family member was affected by the Midland shooting — whether you were injured, whether you lost someone, whether you are the family of the city employee who did not come home — call us. The consultation is free. We do not get paid unless we win your case. We are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, with live staff — not an answering service. Hablamos Español. Ralph Manginello and Lupe Peña will personally evaluate your situation and tell you, honestly, what we can do.
Call 1-888-ATTY-911. That is 1-888-288-9911. Or reach us at our Houston office at (713) 528-9070. The evidence is disappearing. The clock is running. The day you call is the day it starts working for you.