Held at Gunpoint in San Antonio After the Knicks Beat the Spurs? What Texas Law Actually Does for You
You flew to Texas to see your team win a championship. Somewhere between the Frost Bank Center and wherever you parked — on a San Antonio street, in front of witnesses, in the middle of a city you do not live in — a man in a white pickup truck pointed a gun at you and laughed. You and the friend next to you did what most people in that moment would do: you froze, you waited for the truck to move, and then, because the Knicks were about to win a title and you were two thousand miles from home and nothing actually happened — or at least nothing that left a mark — you shook it off. Maybe you even told the story as a funny part of a great trip.
And then you got on the plane. And then the championship parade happened. And then, a few days or a few weeks later, you woke up at 3 a.m. with your heart pounding for no reason, or you flinched when a truck backfired on the LIE, or you told the story at a bar and your friend looked at you and said, “You know you can sue, right?”
If that is you — or if it is the friend who was standing next to you, or the friend who is reading this trying to figure out what to tell you — this page is for you. We are the trial team at Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC. We are a Texas firm. We handle assault, negligent security, and personal injury cases in Bexar County and across the state. We have represented Texas families and Texas tourists for 27+ years, and we have tried cases in federal court and in front of Texas juries. We are writing this page because the incident described in a New York Post article dated June 17, 2026 — a gunpointing at Knicks fans by an unidentified man in a white pickup truck, near the Frost Bank Center and the San Antonio Riverwalk, on the Saturday of the Knicks’ championship-clinching Game 5 over the Spurs — is a real civil case, with real legal rights, attached to a real two-year clock that is already running.
The consultation is free, confidential, and you do not pay us a fee unless we win. You can reach us 24/7 at 1-888-ATTY-911. Hablamos Español. What follows is the most complete plain-English explanation of what Texas law does for a tourist who was held at gunpoint in San Antonio, written by the people who would handle the case if you called us tomorrow morning.
What Happened That Saturday Night in San Antonio — The Facts, With Restraint
We will not name the two victims. The New York Post article that described the incident did not name them, and they have not come forward publicly. The journalist who witnessed the event was a Knicks fan in San Antonio to cover Game 5 of the 2026 NBA Finals, and the article was primarily a travelogue of the trip — 12-hour flight delays, a road trip down I-35 from Dallas, the Buc-ee’s stop in Temple, the four-hour drive south, the takeover of the Riverwalk, the championship-clinching 94-90 comeback, the champagne and cigars on the Riverwalk after the Larry O’Brien trophy was raised. Buried in the middle of it, the journalist wrote that he saw “a lunatic in a white pickup truck laugh and point a gun at two Knicks fans minding their own business waiting to cross a street.”
The two victims “briefly held at what the driver thought was a humorous little gunpoint incident,” the article said, “shook it off right after too.” Some “true and good-hearted Spurs fans” — the article was careful to distinguish them — “waited with them until their car arrived.” The two Knicks fans are not identified by name, age, hometown, or current residence. The pickup truck driver is described only as “a lunatic” in a “white pickup truck,” with no plate number, no employer, no address. The article contains no information about whether the two victims called San Antonio police that night, sought medical attention, or otherwise documented what happened to them. They appear, on the published record, to have done none of those things.
That last fact is the most legally important fact on this page. The two victims did not call the police. The two victims did not get checked out at University Hospital or any other San Antonio medical center. The two victims did not preserve their own video or take down the truck’s plate. They did what most people in that moment would do, and they did not realize, at the time, that what had just happened to them was a second-degree felony under Texas law.
The same article, almost in the same breath, mentioned other incidents from the same weekend — New York fans who got “egged like Victor Wembanyama” in Manhattan, “pseudo-Knicks fans” who did terrible things in New York, and the broader pattern of fan-on-fan violence that both cities experienced. We are not here to litigate that broader pattern. We are here about the man in the white pickup truck. The fact that other bad things happened to other people on the same weekend does not change the law, the deadline, or the evidence clock that applies to the two victims we are talking about here.
Texas Aggravated Assault Law — Pointing a Gun at Someone Is a Second-Degree Felony
Texas Penal Code § 22.02 defines aggravated assault as an assault — a threat of imminent bodily injury — that is accompanied by the use or exhibition of a “deadly weapon.” In Texas, a firearm is, as a matter of law, a deadly weapon. The statute makes that combination a felony of the second degree, punishable by 2 to 20 years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000.
Tex. Penal Code § 22.02(a): “A person commits an offense if the person commits assault as defined in § 22.01 and the person: (1) causes serious bodily injury to another, including the person’s spouse; or (2) uses or exhibits a deadly weapon.”
Two things matter here. First, Texas does not require the gun to be fired. It does not require the victim to be struck. It does not even require the victim to be touched. The threat, accompanied by the visible firearm, is the crime. When a man in a white pickup truck laughs and points a gun at two people waiting to cross a street, he has committed aggravated assault under Texas law — the laugh is not a defense, it is evidence of the malice that elevates the charge.
Second, and more important for the civil case we are here to talk about, the criminal charge is not the only consequence. Texas law, like the law of every other state, allows the victim of an assault to sue the attacker in civil court for money damages — regardless of whether the attacker is ever charged, and regardless of whether he is ever convicted. The civil case and the criminal case are separate proceedings, with different burdens of proof (a “preponderance of the evidence” in civil court, “beyond a reasonable doubt” in criminal court), and the civil case can move forward even if the criminal case never happens at all. We have represented assault victims in Texas for 27+ years. We have built civil cases where there was no police report, no arrest, and no criminal conviction, and we have recovered for the victim.
The driver’s behavior here — laughing while pointing a firearm at strangers — also supplies the malice evidence that Texas requires for punitive damages under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 41.003. We will come back to what that means in dollars later. For now, the key point is this: pointing a gun and laughing is not a prank under Texas law, and it is not a joke under Texas civil practice. It is an assault with a deadly weapon, it is a felony, and it is the basis of a civil case.
The “I Wasn’t Physically Hurt” Problem — Why You Can Still Sue in Texas
The first objection we hear from gunpointing victims is: “I wasn’t hurt. There’s nothing to sue for.” We understand why the feeling is there. You walked away. You got on the plane. You went to work on Monday. You do not have a cast, you do not have stitches, you do not have a hospital bill.
Texas law, however, does not require a physical injury to support a civil assault claim. Texas follows a “modified impact rule” for emotional-distress cases, and the rule is satisfied when the victim suffers a threat of imminent physical injury. Being held at gunpoint — staring down the barrel of a firearm, in the seconds before you knew whether the man in the white pickup was going to pull the trigger — is exactly the kind of imminent physical injury the rule was written to address. The Texas Supreme Court has been clear about this: an assault with a deadly weapon, by itself, supplies the “impact” element that Texas requires.
Texas also recognizes a separate claim for the intentional infliction of emotional distress (“IIED”). The bar in Texas is high — the conduct must be “extreme and outrageous” and “utterly intolerable in a civilized community” (the standard comes from the Texas Supreme Court’s 1993 decision in Boyles v. Kerr, 855 S.W.2d 593). A man laughing while pointing a gun at two strangers who are waiting to cross a street meets that standard. There is no serious argument that it does not.
From Boyles v. Kerr, 855 S.W.2d 593, 602 (Tex. 1993): “[Liability for IIED] has been said to demand a high threshold of injury… It is for the court to determine, in the first instance, whether the defendant’s conduct may reasonably be regarded as so extreme and outrageous as to permit recovery.”
The combination is what gives a gunpointing victim in Texas real legal leverage. The assault tort supplies the impact. The IIED claim supplies the damages for the weeks of bad sleep, the intrusive memories, the anxiety that flares up in a parking lot, the loss of enjoyment of an ordinary day. A jury in Bexar County — the venue where this case would be filed, if filed — can hear both claims, decide both on the same set of facts, and return a verdict that reflects what was actually done to you.
One honest warning: Texas juries in gun-friendly venues can be skeptical of “emotional” claims, especially when the plaintiff was not physically injured. We will not pretend otherwise. The case is harder to win in Bexar County than in some other Texas venues, and it is harder to win without a treating psychiatrist documenting the aftermath in clinical terms. That is why the next section — who else can be sued — matters so much. It is also why the evidence-clock section matters. A case built on a single isolated gunpointing in a tourist corridor, with no treatment record, no contemporaneous report, and no witnesses, is a harder case to win. A case built on a treating psychiatrist’s notes, a delayed SAPD report, surveillance video from the Frost Bank Center, the testimony of the New York Post journalist, and a second defendant — the Frost Bank Center operator — with a checkbook is a different case.
Who You Can Sue Beyond the Driver
The New York Post article identifies the driver only as “a lunatic in a white pickup truck.” The driver is not named, and we are not going to name him here — the people investigating this case need to find him first. But the law does not leave the two victims with the unidentified driver as their only target. Texas civil law creates at least four other categories of potential defendant, and the architecture of who is in each category is what makes a real recovery possible.
The driver himself. The driver is the primary defendant. He is the person who pointed the gun and laughed. He is liable for civil assault and for IIED. The question is identifying him, locating him, and finding a source of money to pay the judgment. If the pickup truck is insured, his auto liability policy is the first place the recovery comes from. If he has personal assets, those are next. If he was working at the time, his employer’s commercial policy may be on the hook as well. The first step in the case — the preservation letters, the public-records requests, the BOLO, the social-media sweeps — is all in service of putting a name and an insurance policy behind the truck.
The truck owner (if different from the driver). Texas recognizes a direct claim against the owner of a vehicle who knowingly entrusts it to an unfit, reckless, or impaired driver. This is the “negligent entrustment” theory. It applies whether the owner loaned the truck to a family member, gave the keys to a friend, or operated a business that put the keys in the driver’s hand. Texas also has a “family purpose doctrine,” which can attach liability to a head of household who maintains a vehicle for the use of family members. If the driver borrowed the pickup from a friend, an employer, or a relative, that person or entity can be a direct defendant. The investigation that puts a name on the truck also puts a name on the owner.
The driver’s employer (if the truck is a work vehicle). Texas operates under the doctrine of respondeat superior — an employer is vicariously liable for the negligent and intentional acts of an employee committed within the scope of employment. If the driver was on the clock, making a delivery, driving between job sites, or running any kind of work-related errand, the employer is on the hook. Texas also recognizes direct claims against the employer for negligent hiring, negligent supervision, and negligent retention — that is, for putting a known-dangerous person behind the wheel in the first place. The first subpoena out, after the driver is identified, is to the driver’s employer. Texas pickup trucks are often commercial work trucks — ranch trucks, contractor trucks, oilfield trucks, delivery trucks — and a negligent-entrustment claim is often what makes the case collectable.
The Frost Bank Center, the surrounding hotels, the parking operators, and the Riverwalk businesses. This is the theory that often decides whether a gunpointing case has real value or not. Texas landowners and business operators owe their invitees — paying customers, ticketed fans, hotel guests — a duty to use ordinary care to protect against the foreseeable criminal acts of third parties. The foreseeability analysis is what makes the case work. The 2026 NBA Finals was the highest-attended, highest-emotion sporting event in San Antonio since the Spurs’ own championship runs. The hometown team lost. The visiting fans were obvious targets. The Frost Bank Center, ASM Global (the arena operator), the surrounding hotels that hosted the New York fans, the parking operators whose lots the fans used, and the Riverwalk businesses where the fans gathered afterward all had heightened foreseeability of exactly the kind of conduct that occurred that night.
If a security plan was not in place, if lighting was not adequate at the crosswalk where the gunpointing occurred, if there were no patrols in the parking-and-pedestrian corridors between the arena and the Riverwalk, if prior similar incidents had been reported and not addressed, the property owners can be on the hook. Negligent-security cases in Texas have produced some of the largest premises-liability verdicts in the state. The defendants in those cases are typically deep-pocketed — the arena operator, the hotel chain, the parking company — and their insurance towers are far larger than the personal auto policy of the man in the pickup truck.
The first preservation letter we send in a case like this goes to ASM Global and to the City of San Antonio. The second goes to the major hotels along the East Side / Riverwalk corridor. The third goes to the New York Post. The fourth goes to the cell-phone carriers for the two victims. The fifth goes to the New York Police Department (if the victims are in the city) and to SAPD (for a delayed report). All of this happens in the first seven to fourteen days. The reason it has to happen in the first seven to fourteen days is the next section.
The Evidence Clock — Surveillance Video Disappears in 14 to 30 Days
There is a piece of information that everyone in the personal-injury bar knows, and that almost no gunpointing victim knows. Sports-venue surveillance systems overwrite themselves in 14 to 30 days. City traffic cameras overwrite themselves in 14 to 30 days. Riverwalk business cameras overwrite themselves in 14 to 30 days. The journalist’s notes and unpublished photographs can be edited or deleted. Cell phones — yours, the journalist’s, anyone else who was there — can be lost, replaced, or auto-delete. The Google Maps timeline on your phone stores location data for 30 to 90 days, then it ages out. The Instagram and TikTok posts that captured the night, if they captured anything, are subject to the authors deleting them on a bad day.
This is the clock that makes the first week the most important week in the case. Once the surveillance video is overwritten, the case becomes a swearing contest between the two victims and an unidentified driver. Once the cell phone video is gone, the only contemporaneous evidence is whatever was published. Once the social media posts are deleted, the only witnesses are the people who can be located years later by a process server. We are not telling you this to scare you. We are telling you this so you understand why the phone call you make this week matters more than the phone call you make next month.
Here is what we send in the first week of a case like this, in the order we send it. First, a litigation-hold letter to ASM Global, the operator of the Frost Bank Center, demanding preservation of all exterior and parking-lot surveillance for the date in question. Second, a Texas Public Information Act request to the City of San Antonio for any SAPD reports, any 911 calls, and any city traffic or Riverwalk camera footage from the date and area in question. Third, a litigation-hold letter to the New York Post and to the journalist, demanding preservation of the journalist’s notes, unpublished photographs, recorded interviews, and any other materials related to the incident. Fourth, a letter to the two victims’ own cell-phone carriers, preserving the carriers’ own tower records and demanding preservation of any backed-up device data. Fifth, a preservation request to the major hotels and parking operators in the area for the date in question. Sixth, a delayed report to the San Antonio Police Department — Texas does not require an immediate report, and SAPD policy allows delayed reports in many circumstances. A delayed report, even days or weeks later, starts the official documentation that gives the case its legal spine.
If you are one of the two victims reading this, the first thing we need from you is everything on your phone. The video you took that night, even if it is five seconds long and shows nothing but the tailgate of a white pickup. The screenshots of any posts you made. The texts you sent a friend the next morning. The receipt from the bar on the Riverwalk. The plane ticket, the hotel confirmation, the Uber receipt, the location history. All of it. Bring the phone, or the iCloud backup, or the Google Photos backup, to the consultation. We work with computer-forensic specialists who can pull the data before any of it is lost.
What the Case Is Worth in Texas — An Honest Conversation
We will not quote you a number on this page. Anyone who quotes you a number for a gunpointing case without reviewing your medical records, the surveillance video, and the identity of the defendant is selling you something. What we can do is tell you the value drivers that a Texas jury — and a Texas defense lawyer — will be looking at, and the honest range that drives a case like this.
The case-value range for a gunpointing case in Texas, per victim, where there is no physical injury, runs from approximately $15,000 on the low end to $250,000 on the high end, before considering the deepest-pocket defendants. The low end of that range assumes a quick settlement with the driver’s auto insurer, no significant medical treatment, and a venue that is not favorable to the plaintiff. The high end assumes a documented PTSD diagnosis, three to six months of psychiatric treatment, prescribed medication, and a defendant with either significant personal assets or a commercial insurance policy that responds.
Three drivers can push a case above the high end of the range. First, a treating psychiatrist who documents PTSD. A clean PTSD diagnosis — made by a qualified psychiatrist, supported by the PCL-5 or CAPS-5 clinical instrument, with a treatment record that includes therapy and appropriate medication (sertraline and Prazosin are the most common prescriptions for gun-related trauma) — is the single biggest multiplier on a gunpointing case. PTSD cases in Texas have produced six-figure verdicts even without a physical injury, because the jury can see the medical record, the medication, the ongoing treatment, and the months of disruption to the plaintiff’s life. Without that medical record, the case is built almost entirely on the plaintiffs’ own testimony, and Texas juries in conservative venues are not generous to plaintiffs who can point to no medical treatment.
Second, a deep-pocket defendant. The driver’s personal auto policy in Texas is required to carry minimum liability limits of 30/60/25 ($30,000 per person, $60,000 per accident, $25,000 property damage). Thirty thousand dollars is the most that the policy will pay out for one victim’s injuries unless the driver carried higher limits or an umbrella policy. If the driver was working at the time, the employer’s commercial auto policy will carry substantially higher limits — typically $1,000,000 or more. If the premises defendants (ASM Global, the hotel, the parking operator) are on the hook, their general liability policies typically carry $1,000,000 to $5,000,000 in limits. The deep-pocket defendant is the difference between a nuisance settlement and a real verdict.
Third, punitive damages. Texas allows punitive damages under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 41.003 where the plaintiff proves by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant acted with malice, gross negligence, or fraud. The laugh, in this case, is the punitive-damages evidence. A man who pointed a gun at two strangers and laughed is a man who, on the civil burden of proof, acted with conscious disregard for the victims’ safety. Punitive multipliers in Texas assault cases routinely run 2x to 4x the compensatory award. The presence of an insurance policy that will respond to a punitive award is what makes the multiplier collectable. Texas case law has held that an insurer can be required to pay a punitive-damages award where the underlying conduct is the kind of conduct the insurance contract was written to cover.
The case value is also constrained by things the article has already disclosed. The two victims “shook it off.” They did not call the police. They did not report the incident at the time. A defense lawyer will use each of those facts against them. The Texas modified comparative negligence rule under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 33.001 — a “51% bar” — means that if a jury finds the victims more than 50% at fault, they recover nothing. We do not think the victims were at fault, and we do not think a Texas jury will either, but the rule is the rule, and we will not pretend it is not there. The honest answer to “what is the case worth” is: the value depends almost entirely on the medical record, the defendant, and the venue. We can tell you which of those is on your side after the first consultation.
Texas Has a Two-Year Deadline. The Clock Started the Night of the Gunpointing.
Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 16.003 gives a personal-injury plaintiff two years from the date the cause of action accrues to file suit. Assault and IIED claims are subject to the same two-year deadline. The clock starts the day the gun was pointed, not the day the victim decided to do something about it, not the day the victims found a lawyer, not the day the victims understood they had a case. The clock is already running.
Two years sounds like a long time. It is not. It is twenty-four months, minus the time that has already passed since Game 5. By the time a treating psychiatrist has built a treatment record, by the time surveillance video has been located and authenticated, by the time the driver has been identified and located, by the time the driver’s employer has been identified, by the time a demand letter has gone out, by the time the insurance company has had its standard 30 to 60 days to respond, by the time mediation has been scheduled and held, by the time suit has become necessary — the two-year clock can be uncomfortably close to running out. The victims who call us this week are giving us the time we need. The victims who call us in twelve months are not.
If the two-year deadline passes without a lawsuit being filed, the case is gone. Forever. There is no “I didn’t know” exception, no “I was too traumatized to act” exception, and no “I live in New York and didn’t know Texas law” exception. The Texas civil statute of limitations is one of the strictest in the country, and the defense will raise it as a complete bar the moment it expires. We have seen Texas assault cases dismissed on the limitations defense by judges who had no choice under the statute. Do not let that happen to you.
The Playbook the Insurance Company Will Run — and How We Counter It
Once a defendant is identified, the defense will run a playbook. The playbook is well-rehearsed, and we have seen every play. Here is what is coming, and here is what we do about it.
Play one: “They shook it off.” The defense will read the New York Post article aloud to the jury and ask how the victims can claim serious emotional distress if they “shook it off” at the scene. The counter is medical. A treating psychiatrist will explain that delayed-onset PTSD is the standard clinical course after a violent trauma, that the immediate “shock and shake it off” response is a documented stress reaction, and that the symptoms typically surface weeks or months later when the body finally processes what happened. The medical record beats the article.
Play two: “No police report.” The defense will argue that the absence of a contemporaneous police report means the incident did not happen, or was not as serious as the plaintiffs claim. The counter is a delayed report filed now, combined with the journalist’s testimony, the surveillance video (if preserved), the cell phone video (if preserved), the cell-tower records (if preserved), and the other witness testimony we can develop from the Frost Bank Center crowd. The lack of a police report is a hurdle, not a wall.
Play three: The recorded-statement trap. Within days of the victims being identified, the driver’s insurance adjuster will call. The adjuster will sound friendly, sympathetic, and helpful. The adjuster will ask the victims to give a recorded statement “just so we can get this on file.” The recorded statement is a trap. It is engineered to get the victims to say “I’m fine,” “it wasn’t a big deal,” “I moved on,” “I’m not even sure I want to pursue this.” Every one of those statements will be played back at deposition and at trial. The counter is the simplest thing in the world: do not give a recorded statement. Refer every call to us.
Play four: The quick settlement with a release. The adjuster may offer a fast check — $2,500, $5,000, sometimes more — in exchange for a full release of all claims. The check usually arrives with a release already printed on the back. The release closes the case forever. The counter is: nothing gets signed until you have talked to a lawyer, and nothing gets signed at all until the medical record is mature and the full value of the case is understood. Quick checks in assault cases almost always undervalue the case by 5x to 20x.
Play five: Social-media surveillance. Once the victims are identified, the defense will pull their public social media looking for anything inconsistent with claimed emotional distress — a smiling photo, a joke about the incident, a check-in at a social event. The counter is to stop posting about the incident, stop posting anything that could be characterized as “moving on,” and assume the defense is watching every platform. Our full guide on what to say — and what not to say — to an insurance adjuster is at our resource on recorded statements and adjuster calls.
How We Build the Case From Here
Here is how a case like this is actually built in Texas, from the first phone call to the mediation that usually resolves it.
Week one. Free confidential consultation. We listen. We explain the law. We tell you what the next 30 days look like. We send the preservation letters — to ASM Global, to the City of San Antonio, to the New York Post, to the journalist, to the cell phone carriers. We file the delayed SAPD report on your behalf. We connect you with a treating psychiatrist who has experience evaluating gun-trauma victims and who will build the medical record that is the spine of the damages case.
Months one through three. Independent investigation. We work with a licensed investigator in Bexar County to develop leads on the driver. We subpoena the cell tower records. We pull the Frost Bank Center surveillance (if preserved). We identify and interview other Knicks fans who were in the area that night. We obtain the journalist’s full notes, with the journalist’s cooperation, and the New York Post’s own materials. We build the file that goes to the driver’s insurance carrier.
Months three through six. Treatment record matures. The psychiatrist’s diagnosis, the therapy notes, the medication record, the PCL-5 or CAPS-5 evaluation — this is the medical file that converts the case from “two tourists who were scared for a moment” to “two people whose lives have been disrupted by a violent trauma.” We continue to develop evidence and to identify all potential defendants, including the premises defendants.
Months six through nine. Demand package is sent. The full file — the medical record, the surveillance video, the witness statements, the journalist’s account, the SAPD report, the law — goes to the defense carrier. The carrier assigns the file to a defense lawyer. The defense lawyer evaluates. In a strong case, the defense lawyer recommends settlement within the policy limits. In a weaker case, the defense lawyer lowballs and we go to mediation.
Months nine through twelve. Mediation. A retired Texas judge or a private mediator hears both sides and tries to bridge the gap. Most gunpointing cases resolve at mediation, and they typically resolve for multiples of the defense’s first offer. If mediation fails, we file suit in Bexar County District Court, and we proceed under the full litigation timeline.
If the driver is never identified. We still pursue the premises defendants. The Frost Bank Center, ASM Global, the hotel, the parking operator — these defendants can be sued on the negligent-security theory even if the actual shooter (or in this case, the actual pointer of the gun) is never found. The plaintiffs’ burden is to prove the negligent-security claim by a preponderance of the evidence, which is a lower bar than identifying a specific third-party criminal by name. The surveillance video and the witness testimony can establish what happened even if the man in the white pickup is never caught.
Federal court. Ralph Manginello, the firm’s managing partner, has been admitted to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas for 27+ years. If the defendants are out-of-state corporate entities, federal jurisdiction may be available under the diversity statute, and we can file in the federal court in San Antonio. Federal court has different procedural rules than Texas state court, and the strategy changes accordingly. We handle both.
Why Bexar County Is a Real Venue, and What That Means for the Case
San Antonio is the seventh-largest city in the United States, and Bexar County is home to a sophisticated jury pool that includes a heavy military and Hispanic presence. Bexar County juries are, on the whole, conservative-leaning and skeptical of “soft” damages — a description that fits most of urban Texas, but that is particularly true in Bexar County. Voir dire in a Bexar County assault case is not optional. It is the case. We will ask potential jurors about their experience with firearms, about concealed-carry licenses, about whether they have ever been the victim of a violent crime, about whether they can award damages against someone who pointed a gun but never fired. We will exercise peremptory strikes aggressively. We will fight for a panel that is open to the seriousness of an aggravated-assault claim.
Texas’s 51% bar modified comparative negligence rule, under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 33.001, is the second venue consideration. A plaintiff who is more than 50% at fault recovers nothing. The defense will almost certainly argue that the two victims could have done something to avoid the encounter — walked a different way, crossed at a different time, paid more attention. We will respond that the victims had a right to be on the public street, that they had a right to cross at a legal crosswalk, and that the conduct of the man in the white pickup truck is the only conduct that caused the harm. We have run this argument in front of Texas juries. We will run it again.
The Bexar County District Court sits at the Cadena-Reeves Justice Center, 300 Dolorosa, in downtown San Antonio. If suit is filed, that is where the petition goes. The judge assigned to the case will be one of the civil district court judges in Bexar County. The trial will take place in San Antonio, in front of a San Antonio jury, applying Texas law. We work in that courthouse. We know the local rules. We know the standing orders. We know how the Bexar County docket moves.
What It Feels Like to Call Us
If you are one of the two victims, or if you are the family member of one of the two victims, or if you are the friend who is trying to help, the first phone call is the hardest one. We have heard the story before. We will not judge you for not calling the police that night. We will not judge you for “shaking it off.” We will not promise you a number. We will not promise you that the case will be easy. What we will do is listen, tell you what Texas law actually does for you, tell you what the next 30 days look like, and tell you what we would do if you hired us tomorrow morning.
The consultation is free. There is no obligation. You do not pay a fee unless we win. We serve Texas families and Texas tourists in English and Spanish. Ralph Manginello has spent 27+ years in courtrooms, including federal court, and he has tried cases against corporate defendants, insurance carriers, and governmental entities across the state. He brings a journalist’s instinct for the story and a competitor’s instinct for the fight. Lupe Peña, our associate attorney, spent years inside a national insurance-defense firm before he crossed to the plaintiffs’ side. He knows how the insurance carrier values your claim before you ever pick up the phone, because he used to set those values. He now uses that knowledge for the people on the other side of the table. You can read more about Ralph at his attorney page and about Lupe at his attorney page. You can also review our full practice areas at our practice overview.
Call us at 1-888-ATTY-911. The line is staffed 24 hours a day. The consultation is confidential, and it costs you nothing. If we are not the right fit for your case, we will tell you. We would rather you call us and learn that than not call us at all.
Frequently Asked Questions
How long do I have to sue in Texas after a gunpointing incident?
Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 16.003 gives you two years from the date of the incident to file a personal-injury lawsuit, and the same two-year deadline applies to assault and IIED claims. The clock started the night the gun was pointed at you — not the night you decided to do something about it, and not the night you found a lawyer. If the two-year deadline passes without a lawsuit being filed, the case is over. There is no exception for trauma, for not knowing the law, or for living out of state. Call us this week.
I was held at gunpoint in San Antonio but I never called the police. Can I still sue?
Yes. Texas does not require a police report to bring a civil case, and a civil case has a lower burden of proof than a criminal case. A delayed report to the San Antonio Police Department can still be filed, and Texas law allows civil assault and IIED claims to proceed even when no criminal charges are ever filed. The lack of a police report is a hurdle, not a wall — it affects how the case is built and how the jury will view the evidence, but it does not bar the claim.
I wasn’t physically injured. Is there really a case here?
Yes, in most circumstances. Texas follows a modified impact rule that is satisfied by a threat of imminent physical injury, and a gun pointed at a person is the textbook example of imminent physical injury. Texas also recognizes IIED claims where the conduct is extreme and outrageous (the standard comes from Boyles v. Kerr, 855 S.W.2d 593 (Tex. 1993)), and a man laughing while pointing a firearm at two strangers meets that standard. The case is built on the assault tort and the IIED claim together, and the damages are real even without a physical injury — they include the emotional distress, the loss of enjoyment of life, the sleep disruption, and the documented PTSD that often follows.
The driver was never identified. Can the case still proceed?
Yes. There are several paths forward even if the man in the white pickup is never caught. The negligent-security defendants (Frost Bank Center, ASM Global, the hotel, the parking operator) can be sued on a foreseeability theory, and the case against them does not require identifying the specific criminal. The truck’s plate can be run through TxDOT and insurance databases, and the registered owner can often be located even when the driver cannot. And, in some cases, the case proceeds as a John Doe action with the unidentified defendant named as “John Doe, Driver of White Pickup Truck,” with service by publication if the defendant cannot be personally located.
What if the driver was a Spurs fan who was just acting on emotion after the loss?
Emotion is not a defense to civil assault. Texas Penal Code § 22.02 makes aggravated assault a second-degree felony regardless of the defendant’s emotional state, and the civil case has the same elements. The fact that the Spurs lost does not reduce the seriousness of pointing a gun at two people who were waiting to cross the street. The defense may try to use the post-game atmosphere to argue contributory negligence or to appeal to a Bexar County jury’s sports loyalties, but the law is the law.
I live in New York. Do I have to come back to Texas for the case?
You will likely have to participate in the case from New York, but you will not necessarily have to come back to Texas for every step. Depositions can often be taken by remote video, and many hearings can be handled by a local Texas attorney appearing on your behalf. We try to keep your travel to a minimum. If the case goes to trial, however, you will need to be in San Antonio for the duration of the trial. We work with our out-of-state clients to make that trip as efficient as possible.
What is the case actually worth in Texas?
The honest range for a gunpointing case in Texas, per victim, with no physical injury, runs from approximately $15,000 to $250,000, with the highest values driven by a documented PTSD diagnosis, a deep-pocket defendant, and a viable punitive-damages claim. The Texas modified comparative negligence rule (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 33.001) caps recovery at the plaintiff’s percentage of fault, and a plaintiff more than 50% at fault recovers nothing. The case value depends on facts we do not yet have — the medical record, the defendant, the venue strategy — and we will not quote you a number on a webpage. We will quote you a range at the consultation, after we have heard the facts.
Will my name be public if I file a lawsuit?
Court filings in Texas are public records, and the petition in a civil case will identify you by name. The extent to which the case becomes public beyond the courthouse depends on media interest, and high-profile incidents can attract media coverage. We work with our clients to manage that exposure, and we file cases under seal or with pseudonyms only in narrow circumstances that the law allows. Most gunpointing cases do not attract significant media attention. This case, because of the New York Post article, may attract more attention than most, and we will be candid about that with you at the consultation.
Can I sue the Frost Bank Center and the surrounding businesses?
Yes, on a negligent-security theory. Texas landowners and business operators owe invitees a duty to use ordinary care to protect against foreseeable criminal acts of third parties. The 2026 NBA Finals, with a sold-out arena, a home-team loss, and visiting fans in team colors walking between the arena and the Riverwalk, was a foreseeability-rich environment. If the security plan, the lighting, the patrols, or the vehicle barriers were inadequate at the crossing where the gunpointing occurred, the premises defendants can be on the hook. Their insurance towers are typically $1,000,000 to $5,000,000, which is what makes a negligent-security claim the difference between a nuisance settlement and a real recovery. Our guide to premises liability and negligent security in Texas is at our practice areas page.
What if the driver had no insurance?
Texas requires all drivers to carry minimum liability coverage of 30/60/25, and the failure to carry insurance is itself a traffic offense. If the driver was uninsured, your own auto policy may carry uninsured-motorist (UM) coverage that responds to an assault committed by an uninsured motorist. Texas law (Tex. Transp. Code § 1952.101 and related provisions) requires UM coverage in every auto liability policy unless the insured rejected it in writing. We will check your own policy as part of the case. If the driver was working, the employer’s commercial policy may respond regardless of the driver’s personal coverage.
How long does a case like this take?
Most gunpointing cases resolve in nine to eighteen months from the date of retention, with the bulk of that time spent in medical treatment and pre-suit investigation. Cases that go to mediation typically resolve in twelve to fifteen months. Cases that go to trial in Bexar County District Court can take eighteen to thirty months. The two-year statute of limitations under § 16.003 sets the outer limit, and we structure our case strategy to ensure that we can file suit within that window if settlement negotiations fail.
What does it cost to hire Attorney911?
You pay us nothing unless we win. The consultation is free, the case evaluation is free, the investigation costs are advanced by the firm, and the legal fee is a percentage of the recovery. If we do not recover for you, you owe us nothing. This is the standard contingency-fee arrangement for Texas personal-injury cases, and it is the only way we work. Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes, but our full explanation of how contingency fees work is at our video resource on contingency fees.
I was not physically injured, but I am having nightmares, trouble sleeping, and panic when I see a white truck. Is that real?
Yes. What you are describing is a textbook delayed-onset trauma response, and it is exactly the kind of symptom a qualified psychiatrist would diagnose and document. We strongly encourage you to seek treatment now, not later. The treatment is good for you, and the medical record is good for your case. A psychiatrist experienced in evaluating gun-trauma victims can build the clinical record that converts “I was scared for a moment” into “I have been living with the aftermath for months.” Our resource on PTSD claims after violent incidents is at our guide to PTSD damages.
The Two Victims Have Real Legal Rights. The Two Victims Have a Real Deadline. The Two Victims Should Not Walk Away.
You shook it off in the moment. That was a reasonable thing to do. The man in the white pickup truck pointed a gun at you, and you did not get shot, and you got on a plane, and you watched your team win a championship. You had every reason to file the night away as one weird moment in a long weekend.
But you also have a Texas civil case. The man in the white pickup committed a second-degree felony under Texas law, and the law gives you the right to sue him, the right to sue his employer if he was working, the right to sue the truck’s owner if a different person put him behind the wheel, and the right to sue the Frost Bank Center, ASM Global, the hotel, and the parking operator if the security plan at the crosswalk where you were held up was inadequate. You have two years from the night of the gunpointing to file suit, and you have a surveillance video and a journalist’s testimony and a cell phone video that is aging out right now.
Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC — has spent 27+ years in Texas courtrooms, including federal court. Ralph Manginello, our managing partner, has tried cases against insurance carriers, corporate defendants, and governmental entities. He is admitted to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas and has been licensed in Texas since 1998. Lupe Peña, our associate attorney, spent years inside a national insurance-defense firm before crossing to the plaintiffs’ side, and he uses that insider knowledge of how carriers value claims, how adjusters set reserves, and how Colossus-style settlement software undervalues injuries to fight for full value on every case. We serve Texas families and Texas tourists in English and Spanish. Hablamos Español.
The consultation is free, the case evaluation is free, and you do not pay a fee unless we win. The line is staffed 24 hours a day at 1-888-ATTY-911. You can also reach us at our contact page. Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes, but the law in Texas is clear: the two victims of a gunpointing incident have a real civil case, and the deadline is already running. The page on this website is legal information, not legal advice for a specific case — that comes from a confidential conversation between you and a lawyer who has read your facts and knows the venue.
Call us. We will listen.
