When a Train Meets a Semi Truck on a Midland County Crossing
If you found this page, you are probably sitting with a question that won’t leave you alone. Maybe you drive a truck in the Permian Basin and a train caught your rig at a crossing. Maybe someone in your family was behind the wheel when the crossing arms came down too late. Maybe you watched the aftermath on a farm-to-market road outside Midland and you cannot stop thinking about how close it came. We are writing this for you — the person who needs to understand what the law says, what the evidence shows, and what to do before the proof disappears and the deadline passes.
A train collided with a semi truck in Midland County, and initial reports indicated no injuries. That particular collision dates to 2013, which means any personal-injury claim from it is now barred by Texas’s two-year statute of limitations — we will be honest about that throughout this page. But the reason we are writing about it is that the collision illustrates a danger that has not gone away. Midland County sits in the heart of the Permian Basin, where thousands of heavy trucks — water haulers, frac sand transporters, crude tankers, equipment movers — cross active freight rail lines every single day. Union Pacific runs the primary east-west corridor through Midland. BNSF operates routes in the broader region. The crossings range from signalized, gated intersections on major roads to passive crossbuck-only crossings on FM roads and private oilfield lease roads. When a loaded semi truck — 80,000 pounds, slow to accelerate, hard to stop — meets a freight train that can weigh thousands of tons and take over a mile to halt, the physics are merciless. And the legal questions that follow are nothing like an ordinary truck crash.
We are Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm. We handle 18-wheeler and commercial truck cases across Texas, including the Permian Basin. We are writing this page as a resource — not because we represent anyone from the 2013 collision, but because the danger it represents is live and ongoing, and the person who needs this information usually needs it fast. If you or a family member has been involved in a train-truck crossing collision in or around Midland County, call us at 1-888-ATTY-911. The consultation is free, we are available 24 hours a day, and we do not get paid unless we win your case.
The Permian Basin’s Unique Railroad Crossing Hazard
Midland County is not a typical driving environment. It is one of the most active oil and gas production regions in the United States, and the truck traffic it generates is extraordinary. Produced water, frac sand, crude oil, drilling equipment — all of it moves by truck, on rural highways and farm-to-market roads that were built for a fraction of the volume they now carry. Those roads intersect active freight rail lines, and the crossings where they meet are not all created equal.
On the major arterials — the highways that carry traffic through Midland and Odessa — you will find signalized crossings with gates, flashing lights, and bells. These are the crossings the federal Section 130 Grade Crossing Improvement Program has invested in upgrading, and they are the ones most likely to give a truck driver warning. But out on the FM roads, the lease roads, the private drives that connect well pads to the highway system, the crossings can be far more basic. A crossbuck sign. Maybe a stop sign. Maybe nothing but a driver’s own eyes and the knowledge that a train could come through at any hour, in either direction, without much warning.
The collision risk at these crossings is amplified by the nature of the trucks themselves. A fully loaded semi truck navigating rough lease roads, approaching tracks with limited sight distance, is a vehicle that cannot stop quickly and cannot accelerate across the rails quickly either. A truck that enters a crossing without enough clearance on the far side — because traffic is backed up, because the road surface is rough, because the grade changes — can become stuck on the tracks. And a freight train, even one running at the posted speed for that crossing, cannot stop in time to avoid a truck that is sitting on the rails. The stopping distance for a freight train at 50 miles per hour is roughly a mile. By the time the engineer sees the truck and applies the emergency brakes, the train has already committed to the physics.
This is the reality that makes Permian Basin rail crossings different from crossing collisions in urban Texas. The truck traffic is heavier. The crossings are more remote. The sight lines are often worse. And the trucks themselves are larger, slower, and more likely to be carrying cargo that turns a collision into a fire.
The Federal Rule Every Commercial Driver Must Know
When a train hits a semi truck at a crossing, the first legal question is not “who had the right of way” in the ordinary sense. It is whether the commercial driver complied with a specific federal regulation that applies to professional drivers and does not apply to ordinary motorists.
Under 49 CFR 392.10, drivers of commercial motor vehicles must stop at railroad crossings and check for approaching trains, with specific mandatory-stop requirements for certain cargo types.
This is not a suggestion. It is a federal regulation binding on every commercial driver operating in interstate commerce. The rule requires a commercial driver to slow down, check the tracks in both directions, and in many cases come to a complete stop before crossing — a heightened duty that a passenger-car driver does not share. For certain types of cargo, the mandatory stop is absolute. And a commercial driver who fails to comply with this rule has not just made a mistake; they have violated a federal safety regulation, which in Texas can be treated as evidence of negligence or even negligence per se, depending on the court’s analysis.
The reason this matters so much in the Permian Basin is that oilfield truck drivers are often under enormous time pressure. The loads are time-sensitive — frac sand needs to be on location when the crew is ready to pump, water needs to move when the well is flowing, crude needs to reach the terminal before it fills the battery. The economic pressure to keep moving, to not stop at every crossing, to rush across the tracks — that pressure is real, and it is exactly what the federal rule was written to counter. The regulation exists because Congress and the FMCSA understood that a professional driver’s judgment under economic pressure cannot be trusted at a railroad crossing, where the consequence of a mistake is not a fender-bender but a catastrophe.
But the driver’s duty is only half the story. The other half is what the railroad owed — and what the crossing itself provided.
Who Is Responsible When a Train Strikes a Truck in West Texas
A railroad crossing collision is rarely a single-defendant case. The legal landscape spreads across multiple parties, each with its own duty, its own insurance, and its own defense team. Here is the map.
The truck driver and the operating motor carrier. If the truck driver failed to stop at the crossing as required by federal regulation, failed to check for trains, or attempted to cross with insufficient clearance on the far side, the driver’s negligence is the starting point. The motor carrier — the company that employed the driver, owned or leased the truck, and dispatched the load — is vicariously liable under respondeat superior if the driver was acting within the course and scope of employment. The carrier may also be directly liable for negligent hiring, training, or supervision if it put a driver on the road who should not have been there. Our Texas oilfield commercial truck accident attorneys are deeply familiar with the specific pressures and patterns of Permian Basin trucking operations.
The railroad company. Union Pacific maintains the primary east-west freight corridor through Midland. BNSF Railway operates routes in the broader region. Both are Class I railroads — massive, self-insured, and defended by some of the most experienced litigation teams in the country. A railroad’s duties at a crossing include maintaining adequate warning devices, keeping sight lines clear of vegetation, operating trains at reasonable speeds for the crossing conditions, and sounding the horn as required. If the crossing had inadequate warning devices — or if the devices that existed were malfunctioning, poorly maintained, or obscured — the railroad may bear responsibility. Railroads also have a duty to maintain the crossing surface itself. A rough, degraded crossing surface can slow a truck at exactly the wrong moment, trapping it on the rails.
The crossing signal maintainer or contractor. If the crossing had active warning devices — gates, lights, bells — but they malfunctioned, the question becomes who was responsible for inspecting and maintaining them. Railroads often contract this work to third-party signal-maintenance companies, and those companies have their own duty to keep the devices in working order. A malfunctioning gate that failed to descend, a light that failed to flash, a bell that failed to ring — each of these is a potential claim against the maintainer.
The governmental entity. If the crossing design or signage was dangerously inadequate, claims may extend to TxDOT or Midland County. The Texas Tort Claims Act governs these claims, and it imposes strict notice requirements and damage limitations that are very different from an ordinary negligence suit. The notice deadlines can be short — measured in months, not years — and missing them can extinguish the claim entirely. This is one of the traps a generalist lawyer might miss: the governmental-claim clock runs faster than the ordinary statute of limitations, and the damages are capped.
The generalist files the complaint naming only the truck driver. The lawyer who knows railroad crossing litigation names the railroad, the signal maintainer, and examines the governmental entity’s role — because the coverage and the fault may sit with any of them, and the driver’s share of fault, while real, may be smaller than the railroad’s defense team wants the jury to believe.
The Evidence That Proves a Crossing Collision — and How Fast It Dies
Every railroad crossing collision generates a trail of evidence. But that trail has an expiration date, and some of it expires fast enough that waiting a few weeks can cost you the case. Here is what exists, who holds it, and how quickly it can legally disappear.
The FRA Railroad Incident Report (Form FRA F 6180.57). The Federal Railroad Administration requires railroads to report highway-rail grade crossing incidents. This document captures the railroad’s own account of the collision — train speed, crew actions, crossing device status, the track geometry, and the weather conditions. It is retained in the FRA’s database long-term, which makes it one of the more durable pieces of evidence. But the railroad’s narrative is just that — its narrative. It is not the whole story, and it is written by a party with every incentive to frame the collision as the truck’s fault.
The Texas DPS Crash Report (CR-3). The Texas Department of Public Safety investigates highway crashes, including crossing collisions, and produces a formal crash report. This document captures the truck driver’s statements, road conditions, any citations issued, and the investigating officer’s assessment. It is available through the DPS records division. But witness memories degrade, and the scene evidence — skid marks, debris patterns, the position of the truck relative to the tracks — is irretrievable after the first rain or the first cleanup crew.
The truck’s Engine Control Module (ECM) data. The truck’s engine computer records speed, brake application, throttle position, and other parameters in the seconds before a collision. This is the truck’s “black box” — and it is the single most important piece of physical evidence on the truck side. The problem: ECM data can be overwritten when the truck is driven again after the crash. If the trucking company puts the vehicle back on the road, or repairs it, or sells it, the data from the collision may be gone within days. A preservation letter — demanding that the truck and its data be frozen — has to go out immediately.
The locomotive event recorder. The train has its own black box. The locomotive event recorder captures speed, throttle position, brake applications, horn activation, and bell activation. This data can prove whether the train was speeding, whether the horn was sounded at the required distance, and when the emergency brakes were applied. Railroads retain this data, but their retention schedules are their own — and a preservation demand needs to reach the railroad’s legal department before the data cycle ends.
Crossing signal inspection and maintenance logs. If the crossing had active warning devices, the railroad or its contractor is required to inspect and maintain them on a regular schedule. The inspection logs show whether the devices were functioning, when they were last tested, and whether any defects were noted. These logs are the proof of a malfunction or a maintenance failure — but they are held by the railroad or the signal company, and they are not going to volunteer them. A targeted discovery demand is the only way to get them.
Dash camera and crossing-area surveillance. Some crossings are equipped with cameras. Some trucks have dash cameras. Some nearby facilities — oilfield locations, gas stations, businesses near the crossing — may have exterior cameras that captured the collision. This footage is the most volatile evidence of all. Surveillance systems overwrite on rolling cycles — often 30 days or less. If no one sends a preservation letter to the camera owner, the footage is gone.
Here is what the generalist misses: the evidence in a crossing collision sits with multiple parties — the trucking company, the railroad, the signal maintainer, the local businesses — and each one has a different retention clock. The preservation letter that saves the case is not one letter; it is a set of letters, each targeted at the right party, demanding the right records, sent before the right deadline. The day you call a lawyer is the day those letters go out. Every day you wait is a day the evidence gets colder.
The Insurance and Coverage Reality in a Train-Truck Collision
The money behind a railroad crossing collision is not like the money behind an ordinary car crash. The coverage towers are different, the defendants are different, and the negotiation dynamics are different.
The trucking company’s coverage. A for-hire interstate carrier of non-hazardous property is federally required to carry at least $750,000 in liability coverage under 49 CFR 387.9. If the truck was hauling hazardous materials, the minimum rises to $1,000,000 for certain materials and $5,000,000 for the most dangerous bulk hazmat. But these are floors, not ceilings. Many Permian Basin carriers carry excess and umbrella layers above the federal minimum. The real coverage tower — primary, excess, umbrella — is discoverable in litigation, but you will not see it until you are in the case. The point is: the trucking company’s insurance is often substantial, but it is finite.
The railroad’s coverage. This is where the picture changes dramatically. Union Pacific and BNSF are not companies with $750,000 insurance policies. They are among the largest transportation corporations in the world, and they are substantially self-insured with massive self-insured retention layers. A Union Pacific or BNSF train that causes a catastrophic injury at a crossing is backed by a balance sheet that dwarfs any trucking company’s policy. This is why naming the railroad — when the facts support railroad liability — can be the difference between a settlement that covers a fraction of the loss and one that accounts for the full measure of harm.
The signal maintainer’s coverage. If a third-party contractor maintained the crossing signals, that contractor carries its own commercial general liability coverage. This is a separate tower from both the trucking company and the railroad, and it is a separate source of recovery if the maintenance failure contributed to the collision.
How the towers interact. When a crossing collision involves a truck, a train, and possibly a signal maintainer, the coverage picture is layered and interlocking. The trucking company’s carrier may point at the railroad. The railroad may point at the truck. The signal maintainer may point at both. Each defendant’s insurance adjuster is working to minimize that defendant’s share of fault — which in Texas directly reduces that defendant’s financial exposure because of the comparative-fault system. The fight over fault percentages is not academic; it is a fight over dollars.
The generalist sees one policy and stops. The lawyer who knows this territory sees three or four towers, understands how they interact, and builds a demand strategy that accounts for all of them.
The Injuries a Train-Truck Collision Causes — and Why “No Injuries” Is Not Always the Final Word
The 2013 Midland County collision was reported with no injuries, and we take that report at face value for that incident. But if you are reading this page because of a more recent collision, you need to understand something about how injury reporting works at the scene of a railroad crossing crash — and why “no injuries reported” does not always mean “no injuries.”
The adrenaline mask. In the immediate aftermath of a violent collision, the body releases a surge of adrenaline and cortisol that can mask pain and suppress symptoms for hours or even days. A truck driver who walks away from a crossing collision, tells the responding officer “I’m fine,” and declines medical treatment at the scene may begin to feel the effects 24, 48, or 72 hours later. Neck pain, back pain, headaches, numbness in the extremities — these are the delayed-onset symptoms that the initial “no injuries” report never captured.
Soft-tissue and spinal injuries. The forces involved when a train strikes a truck are enormous. Even at low train speeds, the mass differential means the truck absorbs a violent transfer of energy. The driver’s body — even belted, even inside the cab — undergoes rapid deceleration and acceleration that can tear muscles, ligaments, and connective tissue that do not show up on a standard X-ray. A CT scan may be clean. The injury is real nonetheless. These are the injuries that insurance adjusters love to challenge — “the scan was normal” — and that require careful medical documentation and, often, MRI or specialist evaluation to prove.
Traumatic brain injury. The brain does not have to hit the skull to be injured. The rapid deceleration of a train-truck collision can cause the brain to twist inside the skull, tearing the axons that connect brain regions — a diffuse axonal injury that a standard CT scan will miss roughly 90% of the time. The driver may feel dazed, confused, or “not right” without knowing why. Memory problems, concentration difficulties, personality changes, headaches that will not stop — these can emerge days or weeks after the collision. The medical literature is clear: a normal CT scan in the emergency room is exactly what doctors expect in a so-called “mild” traumatic brain injury, not proof that no injury exists.
Catastrophic injuries. In the collisions that do not end with “no injuries reported,” the outcomes are devastating. A truck cab sheared off by a locomotive can produce crush injuries, traumatic amputation, spinal cord injury, and severe burns if the diesel fuel or cargo ignites. Crude oil tankers are particularly dangerous — a breached crude tank at a crossing can create a fire that engulfs the cab before the driver can escape. These are the collisions that become wrongful death claims, and they are the ones where every piece of evidence — every log, every recording, every maintenance record — matters most.
The point is this: if you were in a crossing collision and the initial report says “no injuries,” do not let that report become the final word. Get a medical evaluation. Tell the doctor exactly what happened. Let the symptoms declare themselves. And if they do, call a lawyer who understands that “no injuries reported” at the scene is not a medical conclusion — it is a triage note.
The Insurance Adjuster’s Playbook After a Crossing Collision
Within hours of a railroad crossing collision, the insurance machinery starts moving. The trucking company’s carrier, the railroad’s claims department, and possibly the signal maintainer’s insurer all begin building their defense. Here are the plays you should expect — and the counter to each.
Play 1: The recorded statement request. Within days, someone friendly will call the truck driver — or the driver’s family — and ask for a “quick statement” about what happened. It will sound like a routine follow-up. It is not. It is a recorded interview designed to lock in a narrative that helps the insurance company and hurts you. The adjuster is trained to ask questions that elicit statements like “I didn’t see the train” or “I might have been going a little fast” — statements that will be quoted back at deposition, at mediation, and at trial.
The counter: Do not give a recorded statement without speaking to a lawyer first. You are not required to. The adjuster’s request is not a legal obligation — it is a strategy. Every word you say on that recording is evidence. Every word you do not say is not.
Play 2: The quick settlement check. A check may arrive fast — sometimes within weeks of the collision — with a release document attached. The amount will seem reasonable for a minor incident. The release, once signed, extinguishes every claim you have, including claims for injuries that have not yet manifested. The adjuster is counting on the pressure of medical bills, lost wages, and the desire to “put this behind me” to get you to sign before the full scope of the harm is known.
The counter: Never sign a release without having it reviewed by a lawyer. A release is a permanent surrender of rights. The injuries from a train-truck collision can take weeks to fully declare themselves. Signing a release before that process is complete is the single most common way a crossing collision victim loses the value of their case.
Play 3: The “you were at fault” argument. Because the FMCSA requires commercial drivers to stop at railroad crossings, the railroad’s defense team will lean hard on this regulation. Their argument: the truck driver had a federal duty to stop, the driver did not stop (or did not stop properly), therefore the collision is the truck’s fault. This is a powerful argument because the regulation is real and the duty is real. But it is not the whole story.
The counter: The truck driver’s duty to stop does not absolve the railroad of its own duties. If the crossing warning devices were inadequate or malfunctioning, if the train was speeding, if vegetation obscured the sight line, if the horn was not sounded — each of these is a separate act of negligence by the railroad that contributed to the collision. Texas follows a modified comparative fault system: your share of fault reduces your recovery, but it does not eliminate it unless you are 51% or more at fault. The fight over fault percentages is the fight over the value of the case.
Play 4: The social media surveillance. The adjuster’s investigators will check social media. They will look for photos, posts, or check-ins that suggest the injured person is more active than their injury claim suggests. A photo at a family barbecue, a post about a fishing trip, a check-in at a gym — each of these can be taken out of context and presented as evidence that the injury is exaggerated.
The counter: Set every social media account to private. Do not post about the collision, the injuries, the medical treatment, or your daily activities. Do not discuss the case with anyone except your lawyer and your doctors. Assume that everything you post will be shown to a jury.
What to Do in the First 72 Hours After a Train-Truck Collision
If you or a family member has been involved in a railroad crossing collision in Midland County or anywhere in the Permian Basin, here is what needs to happen — in order, without delay.
Hour 1 through 24: Medical evaluation. Even if you feel fine, get checked. Go to Midland Memorial Hospital or the nearest emergency room. Tell the doctor you were in a collision with a train. Describe the forces, the impact, any jolt to your head or body. Let the medical team decide what imaging and evaluation you need. The medical record created in the first 24 hours is the foundation of the injury claim — and a gap between the collision and the first medical visit is a gap the defense will exploit.
Hour 24 through 48: Evidence preservation. This is where the lawyer’s work begins. The preservation letters need to go out — to the trucking company (demanding the truck, the ECM data, the driver’s logs, the driver qualification file), to the railroad (demanding the locomotive event recorder data, the crossing signal inspection logs, the train crew’s hours-of-service records), and to any nearby businesses with surveillance cameras that may have captured the collision. Each letter demands that the recipient preserve specific evidence and warns that destruction after notice may result in sanctions. These letters are the most time-sensitive action in the entire case.
Hour 48 through 72: Documentation and protection. Photograph everything — the truck, the crossing, the warning devices, the road conditions, the sight lines, the vegetation. If the truck has been towed, find out where it is and make sure it is not repaired or scrapped. Do not give a recorded statement. Do not sign a release. Do not post on social media. Do not discuss the collision with anyone except your doctor and your lawyer. If the investigating officer asks for a statement, provide factual information but do not speculate about fault.
The deadline you cannot miss. Texas gives you two years from the date of the collision to file a personal-injury lawsuit. That sounds like a long time. It is not. The evidence preservation, the investigation, the expert retention, and the case building all take months. If a governmental entity — TxDOT, Midland County — is a potential defendant, the notice deadline under the Texas Tort Claims Act is shorter than two years and can be measured in months. The day you call a lawyer is the day the clock starts working for you instead of against you.
Texas Law: Your Rights and Deadlines After a Crossing Collision
Texas law governs railroad crossing collisions that occur in Midland County, and several specific rules shape every case.
The two-year statute of limitations. Texas imposes a two-year deadline for personal-injury lawsuits, running from the date of the injury. If the collision resulted in a death, the wrongful-death claim is also subject to a two-year limitations period. Miss the deadline and the case is over — no matter how strong the evidence, no matter how clear the fault. The 2013 Midland County collision we referenced at the top of this page is now more than a decade past this deadline, which is why no personal-injury claim from that incident could be pursued today. For a current collision, the clock is running right now.
Modified comparative negligence — the 51% bar. Texas follows a modified comparative fault rule. Your recovery is reduced by your percentage of fault, but if you are 51% or more at fault, you recover nothing. In a crossing collision, this is the central battleground. The railroad will argue the truck driver was 51% or more at fault because they failed to stop as required by federal regulation. The truck driver’s side will argue the railroad’s failures — inadequate warnings, excessive speed, poor maintenance — made the railroad substantially at fault. Every percentage point is money. A driver who is 50% at fault recovers; a driver who is 51% at fault recovers nothing. That single point can be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The Texas Tort Claims Act. If TxDOT or Midland County bears responsibility — because the crossing design was dangerous, because signage was inadequate, because the entity had notice of the hazard and failed to act — the claim is governed by the Texas Tort Claims Act. The Act imposes strict notice requirements that can be shorter than the two-year limitations period, and it caps the damages recoverable against a governmental entity. A lawyer who does not know the Tort Claims Act’s deadlines can lose a valid claim on a procedural technicality.
Punitive damages. Texas allows punitive damages — called exemplary damages — in cases involving gross negligence or willful misconduct. A railroad that ignored known signal malfunctions, or a trucking company that dispatched a driver it knew was unqualified, may face punitive exposure. Texas caps punitive damages by statute, but the cap is tied to the amount of economic damages, meaning a case with substantial economic losses can support a significant punitive award.
No general cap on non-economic damages. Unlike some states, Texas does not impose a general cap on non-economic damages (pain and suffering, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life) in non-medical-malpractice personal-injury cases. This means a jury can award the full measure of human loss — the pain, the fear, the life that changed — without a statutory ceiling reducing it. That is one of Texas’s strongest advantages for injury victims, and it is why the quality of the medical evidence and the life-care plan matters so much.
What a Railroad Crossing Truck Collision Case Is Worth
No lawyer can tell you what your case is worth without reviewing the facts, the medical records, and the evidence. But we can tell you how the value is built — and why the adjuster’s first offer is almost always a fraction of it.
Economic damages are the hard-dollar losses: past and future medical expenses, lost wages, lost earning capacity, property damage to the truck, cargo loss, and the cost of future medical care projected by a life-care planner. In a catastrophic injury case — a spinal cord injury, a traumatic brain injury, an amputation — the economic damages alone can run into the millions of dollars across a lifetime. A life-care planner prices out every surgery, every therapy session, every piece of medical equipment, every medication, and every caregiver hour the injured person will need for the rest of their life. A forensic economist then reduces that cost stream to present value. That number — the present value of a lifetime of care — is the economic foundation of the demand.
Non-economic damages are the human losses: pain and suffering, mental anguish, physical impairment, disfigurement, and the loss of the life the injured person was living before the collision. These are the damages the insurance company cannot quantify with a receipt — and they are the damages the defense tries hardest to minimize. In Texas, there is no general statutory cap on non-economic damages in a non-medical-malpractice personal-injury case, which means the jury can award the full measure of what the harm is worth.
Wrongful death damages. If the crossing collision resulted in a death, the surviving family members — the spouse, the children, the parents — can recover for the loss of the decedent’s earning capacity, the loss of the care and counsel the decedent would have provided, and the mental anguish and emotional pain of the loss. In Texas, wrongful-death damages are significant, and the lack of a general non-economic cap means a jury can fully value what a life was worth to the people who lost it.
The honest range. For a crossing collision with no injuries and property damage only — like the 2013 Midland County incident — the personal-injury case value is zero, and the matter is typically resolved through property-damage subrogation between insurers. For a crossing collision with serious injuries, the case value depends on the severity of the injury, the clarity of the liability evidence, the number and depth of the defendants’ coverage towers, and the jurisdiction. A catastrophic injury case against a railroad and a trucking company, with strong liability evidence on the railroad side, can reach into the millions. A case where the truck driver is clearly 100% at fault and the railroad’s conduct was blameless is worth far less, because the only coverage is the trucking company’s policy.
We will not promise you a number. We will tell you this: the first offer from the insurance company is almost never the full value of the case. It is a number designed to close the file cheaply. The real value is built from the evidence, the medical records, the life-care plan, and the willingness to take the case to trial if the defendant will not pay what it is worth.
Past results depend on the facts of each case and do not guarantee future outcomes. What we can promise is that we will build the case the right way — from the evidence forward, from the medicine forward, and from the law forward — and that we will not settle for less than the case is worth.
Why Attorney911 Handles Permian Basin Truck and Crossing Cases
We are Attorney911 — The Manginello Law Firm, PLLC. We are based in Houston, with offices in Austin and Beaumont, and we take commercial-truck and catastrophic-injury cases across Texas, including the Permian Basin. We are not writing this page because we were hired on the 2013 Midland County collision. We were not. We are writing it because the danger that collision represents is live, and the person who needs this information usually needs it at a moment when everything is on the line.
Ralph Manginello is our Managing Partner. He has been licensed in Texas since November 6, 1998 — 27+ years of trial practice, including admission to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. He was a journalist before he was a lawyer, which means he asks questions for a living and he does not accept easy answers. He has spent his career in courtrooms, including federal court, and he takes cases against companies that expect to outspend the other side. Read more about Ralph.
Lupe Peña is our associate attorney. He was licensed in Texas in December 2012, and he is also admitted to the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas. Before he joined this firm, Lupe worked inside a national insurance-defense firm — the rooms where adjusters and their software decide how to deny, delay, and devalue claims. He knows how the insurance industry values a claim, how it sets reserves in the first 48 hours, how it selects IME doctors, and how it uses surveillance and social media. He now uses that knowledge for injured clients. Lupe is fluent in Spanish and conducts full consultations in Spanish without an interpreter. Read more about Lupe.
We work on contingency. That means we do not get paid unless we win your case. The fee is 33.33% before trial and 40% if the case goes to trial. The consultation is free. We have live staff available 24 hours a day — not an answering service, but people who can start the evidence-preservation process the moment you call.
If you or a family member has been involved in a railroad crossing collision in Midland County, Odessa, or anywhere in the Permian Basin — whether you were in the truck, in another vehicle, or you lost someone — call us at 1-888-ATTY-911. We will tell you honestly whether you have a case, what it is worth, and what the next steps are. And if we are not the right fit for your situation, we will tell you that too. Hablamos Español.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I sue if a train hit my truck at a Midland County railroad crossing?
Yes — if the collision resulted in injury or property damage and you were not solely at fault, you can pursue a claim against the parties responsible. In Texas, you have two years from the date of the collision to file a personal-injury lawsuit. If the collision involved a governmental entity (such as TxDOT or Midland County for a dangerous crossing design), shorter notice deadlines may apply. The key is acting quickly to preserve evidence and meet the deadlines.
Who is at fault when a train hits a semi truck at a crossing?
Fault in a crossing collision is rarely one party’s responsibility alone. The truck driver may bear fault for failing to stop or check for trains as required by federal regulation. The railroad may bear fault for inadequate warning devices, excessive speed, or failure to sound the horn. A signal-maintenance contractor may bear fault if crossing devices malfunctioned. A governmental entity may bear fault if the crossing design was dangerous. Texas uses a modified comparative fault system — each party’s percentage of fault is determined, and your recovery is reduced by your share but is not eliminated unless you are 51% or more at fault.
What is the FMCSA railroad crossing rule for commercial drivers?
Federal regulation 49 CFR 392.10 requires commercial motor vehicle drivers to slow down and check for approaching trains at railroad crossings, and to come to a complete stop before crossing in many circumstances. Certain cargo types carry an absolute mandatory-stop requirement. This is a heightened duty that does not apply to ordinary passenger-car drivers. A violation of this regulation can be treated as evidence of negligence or negligence per se in a Texas personal-injury case.
How long do I have to file a lawsuit after a train-truck collision in Texas?
Texas imposes a two-year statute of limitations on personal-injury and wrongful-death claims, running from the date of the injury or death. If a governmental entity is a potential defendant, the Texas Tort Claims Act may impose a shorter notice deadline. Missing the deadline permanently bars the claim. The two-year window sounds generous, but evidence preservation, investigation, and expert retention take months — which is why the sooner you contact a lawyer, the stronger the case.
What if the railroad crossing signals weren’t working?
If the crossing had active warning devices — gates, lights, bells — and they failed to function properly, the railroad and the signal-maintenance contractor may be liable. The evidence that proves a signal failure lives in the crossing signal inspection and maintenance logs, which the railroad or its contractor holds. A preservation letter demanding those logs must be sent quickly, because the retention schedules for these records are set by the railroad and the contractor, not by statute. A signal failure can shift a significant portion of fault from the truck driver to the railroad — which can be the difference between a barred claim and a substantial recovery.
What evidence do I need to preserve after a crossing collision?
The critical evidence includes: the truck’s engine control module (ECM) data, which records speed and braking before the collision; the locomotive event recorder data, which shows train speed, horn activation, and brake application; the FRA railroad incident report; the Texas DPS crash report; the crossing signal inspection and maintenance logs; any dash-camera or surveillance footage from nearby cameras; and the driver’s hours-of-service logs and driver-qualification file. Each piece of evidence is held by a different party and has a different retention clock. The preservation letters that freeze this evidence must go out within days, not months.
Can I still recover if the truck driver was partially at fault?
Yes. Texas follows a modified comparative negligence rule with a 51% bar. If you were 50% at fault, you can still recover 50% of your damages. If you were 51% at fault, you recover nothing. The fight over fault percentages is the fight over the value of the case — and the railroad’s defense team will work hard to push the truck driver’s share above 50%. A skilled lawyer counters by proving the railroad’s own failures — inadequate warnings, excessive speed, poor maintenance — which shifts fault away from the truck driver and toward the railroad.
How much is a train-truck collision case worth?
The value depends on the severity of the injuries, the clarity of the liability evidence, the coverage available from each defendant, and the jurisdiction. A crossing collision with no injuries has minimal personal-injury value. A collision with serious injuries — spinal cord injury, traumatic brain injury, amputation, severe burns — can be worth millions, particularly if a Class I railroad like Union Pacific or BNSF bears significant fault and its self-insured retention is in play. The economic damages (medical bills, lost wages, future care) plus non-economic damages (pain and suffering, loss of enjoyment of life) are built from the medical evidence and a life-care plan. No honest lawyer gives you a number on the first call — but the first offer from the insurance company is almost never the full value.
What if my loved one was killed at a railroad crossing in the Permian Basin?
A fatal crossing collision gives rise to a wrongful-death claim under Texas law. The surviving spouse, children, and parents can recover for the loss of the decedent’s earning capacity, the loss of care and counsel, and the mental anguish of the loss. The two-year statute of limitations applies. In a wrongful-death case, the evidence is even more critical — because the person who could tell the jury what happened is gone, the physical evidence (the ECM data, the event recorder, the signal logs, the scene photographs) has to speak for them. The preservation letter is not optional; it is the case.
Does workers’ compensation cover a truck driver hit by a train?
If the truck driver was an employee of a motor carrier that carries workers’ compensation insurance, the driver may be entitled to workers’-comp benefits regardless of fault. But workers’ comp is a limited remedy — it pays medical bills and a portion of lost wages, but it does not pay for pain and suffering, and it bars a lawsuit against the employer. The real value in a crossing collision often lies in the third-party claim — the claim against the railroad, the signal maintainer, or another non-employer defendant whose negligence contributed to the collision. A third-party claim is not barred by workers’ comp and can recover the full measure of damages, including pain and suffering and, in death cases, wrongful-death damages. The workers’-comp claim and the third-party claim run in parallel, and an experienced lawyer manages both.
Why should I call Attorney911 instead of handling this myself?
Because the evidence in a railroad crossing collision is held by multiple parties with different retention clocks, because the coverage towers are layered and complex, because the comparative-fault fight can make or break the case, and because the railroad’s defense team has done this before — many times. You have not. The day you call us is the day the preservation letters go out, the evidence gets frozen, and the clock starts working for you. The consultation is free, we are available 24 hours a day, and we do not get paid unless we win. Call 1-888-ATTY-911. Hablamos Español.