Lessons from the Momoa-Bonet Divorce – for Texans

Jason Momoa and Lisa Bonet’s divorce became final last week. People often wonder how a non-celebrity divorce compares to a celebrity divorce. There are also good lessons for anyone going through a high-profile divorce. In this article, we will take a look at the Momoa-Bonet for lessons about the divorce process itself. As Texas divorce lawyers, we’ll be discussing how the process would work in Texas.

Momoa-Bonet Origin Story

Jason Momoa and Lisa Bonet are both well-known actors in Hollywood, with Momoa gaining widespread fame for his roles in “Game of Thrones” and as Aquaman in DC films, while Bonet is best known for her role as Denise Huxtable on “The Cosby Show” and its spinoff “A Different World.” The couple reportedly met through mutual friends in 2005 at a jazz club in Los Angeles, where they instantly connected and began their relationship.

Timeline of the Momoa-Bonet Divorce

The two reportedly separated on October 7, 2020, their third wedding anniversary, which they announced in January of 2022.

• January 8, 2024 – Lisa Bonet officially files for divorce.
• January 9, 2024 – The terms of the divorce settlement were reached.
• July 9, 2024 – The divorce became final after California’s mandatory six-month waiting period.

Texas Perspective

In Texas, our minimum waiting period for a divorce is 60 days from the date of filing, significantly shorter than California’s six-month rule. However, most Texas divorces take between 6 to 12 months to finalize, depending on the case’s complexity and the level of agreement between parties. It’s worth pointing out that even though the terms of the Momoa-Bonet divorce were agreed upon the day after filing, the mandatory waiting period still had to be followed. The same is true in Texas. Even if you have an uncontested divorce, you have to wait the mandatory 60 days before the court can finalize your divorce.

Settlement Details

The divorce settlement included several key components:

• Child Custody: Joint legal custody of their two children, ages 16 and 15
• Child Support: No formal child support arrangement; agreement to share living expenses
• Spousal Support: Both parties waived rights to spousal support
• Asset Division: Agreed upon division of assets without dispute
• Travel Expenses: The parent traveling with the children is responsible for expenses during trips

Texas Perspective

In Texas, we use the term “conservatorship” instead of custody. Joint managing conservatorship (similar to joint legal custody) is presumed to be in the child’s best interest unless proven otherwise.

While Momoa and Bonet agreed to share expenses without formal child support, in Texas, child support is typically required and calculated based on the non-custodial parent’s income. However, the court may approve a different arrangement if both parties agree and it’s in the children’s best interest.

Spousal support (called “spousal maintenance” in Texas) is less common and has specific eligibility requirements. It’s typically limited in duration and amount.

Asset division in Texas follows community property laws, meaning assets acquired during marriage are typically split 50/50, though courts can deviate for a “just and right” division.

Basis for Divorce

The official reason cited for the divorce was “irreconcilable differences.” In their public statement, the couple alluded to personal growth and societal changes as factors in their decision to separate.

Texas Perspective

In Texas, we use “insupportability” as grounds for divorce, which is similar to California’s “irreconcilable differences.” This is our no-fault option and is the most commonly used ground for divorce in Texas. We also have fault-based grounds such as cruelty, adultery, and abandonment, but these are less common and not necessary to obtain a divorce.

Impact on Children

The divorce settlement prioritized the well-being of their children:

• Joint legal custody ensures both parents have equal say in important decisions
• Shared living expenses without formal child support suggests flexible financial arrangements
• The couple emphasized their commitment to co-parenting and maintaining family bonds

Texas Perspective

Texas courts prioritize the best interests of the child in all decisions. While joint managing conservatorship is common, the specifics of possession schedules and decision-making rights can vary. Texas has standard possession orders, but parents can agree to customize arrangements that better suit their family’s needs.

Navigating a High-Profile Divorce

• Private Resolution: Resolving major issues privately before filing can lead to a smoother, faster process. In Texas, collaborative divorce can be an attractive option to keep things out of the public arena.
• Amicable Approach: Maintaining a cordial relationship can facilitate quicker settlements and better outcomes for children. Of course, we have handled local celebrity divorces that could not be resolved amicably, but it is always worth a discussion if there’s an interest in keeping your name out of the news.
• Flexibility: Some couples find that customizing arrangements (e.g., shared expenses instead of formal child support) works well.
• Legal Preparation: Having all documents and agreements ready before filing can expedite the process.
• Public Handling: For high-profile couples, a joint statement can help manage public perception and protect privacy. Our office is uniquely equipped to handle media coverage with a former Star-Telegram reporter (with hundreds of reporter contacts), ensuring we manage public perception.

Texas Perspective

These lessons apply equally in Texas. While our laws may differ in some respects, the benefits of amicable resolution, thorough preparation, and prioritizing children’s well-being are universal. In Texas, we encourage mediation and collaborative law processes to help couples reach agreements outside of court, which can lead to faster, less expensive, and more satisfactory outcomes.

The Momoa-Bonet divorce demonstrates that even complex, high-profile separations can be handled swiftly and amicably when both parties are prepared and cooperative. Their approach to maintaining family bonds and prioritizing their children’s well-being while allowing for personal growth could serve as a model for others facing similar life transitions, both in California and Texas.

Introduction to Mediated Settlement Agreements

In the realm of Texas family law, a Mediated Settlement Agreement (MSA) is a powerful tool for resolving disputes outside of the courtroom. An MSA is a legally binding contract reached by parties in a family law case with the assistance of a neutral third-party mediator. This agreement outlines the terms and conditions that both parties have agreed upon to settle their disputes, whether they involve divorce, child custody, property division, or other family-related issues.

Definition

A Mediated Settlement Agreement is defined as a written agreement reached through mediation that resolves some or all issues in a family law case. It is signed by each party to the agreement and their attorneys (if represented) and meets specific requirements set forth in the Texas Family Code.

Importance in Texas Family Law

MSAs have become increasingly important in Texas family law for several reasons:

• Efficiency: They often result in faster resolution of disputes compared to litigation.
• Cost-effectiveness: MSAs typically cost less than protracted court battles.
• Control: Parties have more control over the outcome than in a court-imposed judgment.
• Reduced conflict: The collaborative nature of mediation can help preserve relationships, which is particularly important in cases involving children.
• Enforceability: When properly executed, MSAs are difficult to overturn, providing certainty and finality.

Legal Framework

The legal framework for MSAs in Texas is primarily governed by the Texas Family Code. The relevant provisions are found in Sections 6.602 (for divorce cases) and 153.0071 (for suits affecting the parent-child relationship).

Texas Family Code Provisions

Section 6.602 of the Texas Family Code outlines the requirements for MSAs in divorce cases:

• The agreement must be in writing.
• It must be signed by each party to the agreement.
• If the parties are represented by attorneys, the attorneys must sign the agreement as well.
• The agreement must state, in prominently displayed text, that it is not subject to revocation.
• It must be signed by the parties and their attorneys (if any) on the day the mediation concludes.

Section 153.0071 provides similar requirements for MSAs in suits affecting the parent-child relationship, with an additional provision that the agreement is binding on the court unless it finds that the agreement is not in the child’s best interest.

Benefits of Mediated Settlement Agreements

Cost-effective

MSAs can significantly reduce the financial burden of family law disputes. By avoiding lengthy court proceedings, parties can save on attorney fees, court costs, and other litigation-related expenses. Mediation typically takes less time than litigation, which translates to fewer billable hours for attorneys.

Time-saving

The mediation process is often much quicker than litigation. While a contested divorce or custody case can take months or even years to resolve in court, mediation can sometimes reach a resolution in a single day or over a few sessions.

Confidentiality

Unlike court proceedings, which are generally public, mediation is a confidential process. This confidentiality allows parties to discuss sensitive issues openly without fear of public disclosure, leading to more honest and productive negotiations.

Control over outcomes

In mediation, the parties have direct input into the terms of their agreement. This control often leads to more satisfactory and sustainable outcomes compared to court-imposed judgments, as the parties themselves craft solutions that work for their unique situations.

Process of Mediation in Texas Family Law

Choosing a mediator

Selecting the right mediator is crucial to the success of the mediation process. Parties should look for a mediator who:

• Is knowledgeable about Texas family law
• Has experience in mediating similar cases
• Possesses strong communication and negotiation skills
• Is impartial and respected by both parties

Preparing for mediation

Proper preparation is key to a successful mediation. This includes:

• Gathering all relevant financial documents and information
• Identifying key issues and priorities
• Preparing a list of possible solutions or compromises
• Discussing strategy with your attorney (if represented)
• Being emotionally prepared for negotiation and potential compromise

Stages of the mediation process

1. Introduction: The mediator explains the process and sets ground rules.
2. Opening statements: Each party (or their attorney) presents their perspective.
3. Joint discussion: Parties identify issues and interests.
4. Private caucuses: The mediator meets separately with each party to discuss positions and explore potential solutions.
5. Negotiation: Parties work towards finding mutually acceptable solutions.
6. Agreement: If successful, the terms are drafted into a written agreement.

Key Components of a Valid Agreement

Required elements

To be valid and enforceable, an MSA must include:

• Clear and specific terms addressing all resolved issues
• Signatures of all parties and their attorneys (if represented)
• A prominently displayed statement that the agreement is not subject to revocation
• Date of execution (which must be the day the mediation concludes)

Common provisions

Depending on the nature of the case, an MSA may include provisions related to:

• Property division
• Child custody and visitation schedules
• Child support
• Spousal maintenance
• Division of debts
• Tax considerations
• Insurance coverage
• Dispute resolution mechanisms for future disagreements

Enforceability of Mediated Settlement Agreements

Statutory requirements

To be enforceable, an MSA must meet all the requirements set forth in the Texas Family Code. If these requirements are met, the agreement is binding on the parties and, in most cases, on the court as well.

Exceptions and challenges

While MSAs are generally difficult to overturn, there are limited circumstances under which a court may refuse to enforce an agreement:

• Fraud, duress, or coercion in the making of the agreement
• In child-related matters, if the court finds that the agreement is not in the best interest of the child and that:
  • A party to the agreement was a victim of family violence, and that impaired their ability to make decisions
  • The agreement would permit a person who is subject to sex offender registration to have unsupervised access to a child

Special Considerations

Child custody and support issues

When dealing with child-related matters, the court must always consider the best interest of the child. While an MSA is presumed to be in the child’s best interest, the court retains the authority to reject an agreement if it finds otherwise.

Property division

In divorce cases, MSAs often address the division of marital property. Texas is a community property state, which means that property acquired during the marriage is generally considered to belong equally to both spouses. However, parties can agree to a different division through an MSA.

Spousal maintenance

If applicable, an MSA may include provisions for spousal maintenance (alimony). The agreement should specify the amount, duration, and conditions of any maintenance payments.

Alternatives to Mediated Settlement Agreements

While MSAs are popular, they are not the only alternative to litigation:

Collaborative law

This process involves a commitment by both parties and their attorneys to resolve disputes without going to court. It often involves a team approach, including financial experts and mental health professionals.

Arbitration

In arbitration, a neutral third party hears evidence and makes a binding decision. It’s more formal than mediation but less formal than court proceedings.

Litigation

Traditional court proceedings remain an option when parties cannot reach an agreement through other means.

Best Practices for Successful Mediation

Tips for Parties

• Approach mediation with an open mind and willingness to compromise
• Focus on interests rather than positions
• Listen actively to the other party’s concerns
• Be prepared with all necessary information and documentation
• Consider the long-term implications of any agreement
• Take breaks when needed to manage emotions and avoid rushed decisions

Mediator selection criteria

• Experience in Texas family law
• Strong communication and facilitation skills
• Impartiality and neutrality
• Ability to manage high-conflict situations
• Understanding of complex financial and legal issues

Why Should I Get a Mediated Settlement Agreement?

Faster resolution of disputes, lower costs compared to litigation, greater control over the outcome, preservation of relationships, confidentiality of the process, flexibility in crafting solutions, and reduced stress and emotional toll.

Pros and Cons of a Mediated Settlement Agreement

Pros:

• Cost-effective
• Time-efficient
• Confidential
• Parties retain control
• Can be tailored to unique situations
• Generally less adversarial than litigation

Cons:

• May not be suitable for high-conflict cases
• Requires willingness to compromise
• Can be challenging if there’s a power imbalance between parties

What Makes a Mediated Settlement Agreement Special?

Mediated Settlement Agreements (MSAs) are granted statutory protection under Texas law, giving them a special status. They are difficult to revoke and, once signed, are generally binding. Courts are required to enter judgment on a valid MSA, ensuring expedited enforcement. Additionally, MSAs offer flexibility, allowing for creative solutions that are not always available in court.

How Does a Mediated Settlement Agreement Differ from Other Agreements?

Mediated Settlement Agreements (MSAs) must meet specific legal criteria, ensuring they adhere to statutory requirements. They involve the participation of a neutral mediator and carry a presumption of enforceability. MSAs have limited grounds for challenge and can resolve all issues in a family law case.

How Do I Get a Mediated Settlement Agreement?

• Agree with the other party to attempt mediation
• Select a qualified mediator
• Prepare for the mediation session
• Participate in good faith in the mediation process
• If an agreement is reached, ensure it meets all legal requirements
• Sign the agreement on the day mediation concludes

What Does a Mediated Settlement Agreement Contain?

A Mediated Settlement Agreement (MSA) must include clear and specific terms addressing all resolved issues. It should detail property division, child custody and support provisions, spousal maintenance terms, and any other agreed-upon terms relevant to the case. Additionally, it must contain the required statutory language and the signatures of all parties and attorneys.

What If I Don’t Like My Mediated Settlement Agreement?

Once signed, an MSA is generally binding and not subject to revocation. Limited grounds for challenging an MSA exist (e.g., fraud, duress). It’s crucial to carefully consider all terms before signing. Consult with an attorney before and during the mediation process. Take time to fully understand the agreement before signing.

Conclusion

Mediated Settlement Agreements offer a powerful tool for resolving family law disputes in Texas. They provide a cost-effective, efficient, and flexible alternative to litigation, allowing parties to maintain control over the outcome of their case. While not without challenges, MSAs have become an increasingly popular and effective means of resolving family law matters, benefiting both the parties involved and the Texas legal system as a whole.

We have covered the Trump classified documents case since the indictment. To recap the background, in June 2023, a federal grand jury in the Southern District of Florida returned an indictment against former President Donald Trump, charging him with 31 counts of willful retention of national defense information under 18 U.S.C. § 793(e), along with several conspiracy and concealment charges. This case stemmed from an investigation into classified documents found at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence after he left office.

The investigation and subsequent prosecution were led by Special Counsel Jack Smith, who Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed in November 2022. Smith’s appointment came in response to the politically sensitive nature of investigating a former president and potential candidate for the upcoming election.

On February 22, 2024, Trump’s legal team filed a motion to dismiss the indictment, challenging the legality of Smith’s appointment and the funding of his office. This motion set the stage for Judge Aileen Cannon to dismiss the case on July 15, 2024.

The Appointments Clause and Its Significance

At the heart of this case is the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2). This clause outlines the process for appointing federal officers:

“[The President] shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.”

This clause serves several crucial functions in the U.S. constitutional system:

• It ensures a separation of powers by involving both the executive and legislative branches in the appointment process for high-level officials.
• It provides a check on executive power by requiring Senate confirmation for principal officers.
• It allows for efficiency in government by permitting Congress to authorize the appointment of inferior officers by department heads or the President alone.

Trump Classified Documents Case Dismissed

The Court’s Reasoning

Judge Aileen Cannon’s order granting the motion to dismiss rests on several key points of reasoning:

Lack of Statutory Authority

The court examined the statutes cited in Smith’s appointment order (28 U.S.C. §§ 509, 510, 515, 533) and concluded that none of them actually grants the Attorney General the power to appoint a special counsel with the full authority of a U.S. Attorney.

The judge engaged in a detailed textual analysis of each statute, finding that they either deal with the general organization of the Department of Justice (§§ 509, 510), provide for the appointment of special attorneys to assist U.S. Attorneys (§ 515), or authorize the appointment of investigative officials within the FBI (§ 533).

Historical Practice and Congressional Intent

While acknowledging the historical use of special prosecutors and counsels, the court found that this practice has been inconsistent and does not amount to tacit congressional approval of the current appointment method. The judge emphasized that when Congress intends to create offices for special prosecutors, it has done so explicitly, as with the now-expired Independent Counsel Act.

Rejection of Nixon Precedent

The court addressed the government’s reliance on a statement in United States v. Nixon (1974) that seemed to approve the statutory basis for special counsel appointments. Judge Cannon determined that this statement was dicta (non-binding commentary) and not essential to the Nixon decision’s holding.

The court noted that the statutory authority for the Special Prosecutor’s appointment was not an issue that was raised, briefed, or argued before the Supreme Court in Nixon. The focus of that case was primarily on executive privilege and the justiciability of an intra-branch dispute.

The court also noted that in the decades since Nixon, the Supreme Court has placed renewed emphasis on the structural principles underpinning the Appointments Clause, beginning with Buckley v. Valeo in 1976. This evolving jurisprudence further supports treating Nixon‘s statement as non-binding in the current legal landscape.

Principal vs. Inferior Officer Status

While not ultimately relying on this point for her decision, Judge Cannon expressed skepticism about whether Smith could be considered an “inferior officer” not requiring Senate confirmation. She noted the broad powers granted to Smith and the limited supervision by the Attorney General under the current special counsel regulations.

Appropriations Clause Violation

In addition to the Appointments Clause issue, the court found that Smith’s office was improperly funded through a permanent indefinite appropriation intended for independent counsels appointed under now-expired statutes or “other law.” Since the court found no valid “other law” authorizing Smith’s appointment, it concluded that this funding violated the Appropriations Clause of the Constitution.

The Dismissal and Implications

The court dismissed the indictment against Trump and his co-defendants. While the order does not explicitly state whether the dismissal is with or without prejudice, this is a dismissal without prejudice from a procedural standpoint. From a practical standpoint, it is hard to imagine this case could be developed independently from the work that Special Counsel Smith put into this and the dollars already spent. Instead, the Government, if it wishes to move forward, is likely to appeal this decision.

The order dismissing the case states that “all actions that flowed from his defective appointment—including his seeking of the Superseding Indictment on which this proceeding currently hinges—were unlawful exercises of executive power.” This language implies that Smith’s entire investigation and prosecution were tainted by the constitutional violation.

Challenges in Bringing New Charges

Even if the dismissal were technically without prejudice, there would be significant challenges in bringing these charges again:

• Tainted Evidence: Any evidence gathered by Smith’s office during the investigation could potentially be considered “fruit of the poisonous tree” and thus inadmissible in a new prosecution.
• Time Constraints: The process of appointing a new prosecutor (either through Senate confirmation or by reassigning the case to a U.S. Attorney’s office) and potentially re-investigating aspects of the case could bump up against statutes of limitations for some charges.
• Political Considerations: Given the high-profile nature of the case and its dismissal on constitutional grounds, there may be political reluctance to pursue a new prosecution, especially as the 2024 election approaches.
• Double Jeopardy Concerns: While double jeopardy wouldn’t technically apply to a dismissal before trial, defense attorneys could potentially argue that the extensive pre-trial proceedings have already put Trump in jeopardy.

The Appeal Process

The Department of Justice has the right to appeal this decision, and given the significance of the case, an appeal is highly likely. The appeal would go to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, which has jurisdiction over federal cases from Florida, Georgia, and Alabama.

The Eleventh Circuit currently has 12 active judges:

• William H. Pryor Jr. (Chief Judge, appointed by George W. Bush)
• Charles R. Wilson (appointed by Bill Clinton)
• Beverly B. Martin (appointed by Barack Obama)
• Adalberto Jordan (appointed by Barack Obama)
• Robin S. Rosenbaum (appointed by Barack Obama)
• Jill A. Pryor (appointed by Barack Obama)
• Kevin C. Newsom (appointed by Donald Trump)
• Elizabeth L. Branch (appointed by Donald Trump)
• Britt C. Grant (appointed by Donald Trump)
• Robert J. Luck (appointed by Donald Trump)
• Barbara Lagoa (appointed by Donald Trump)
• Andrew L. Brasher (appointed by Donald Trump)

As of July 2024, the balance of the court leans conservative, with seven judges appointed by Republican presidents and five by Democratic presidents. However, it’s important to note that a judge’s appointing president doesn’t always predict how they will rule, especially on complex constitutional issues.

The appeal would typically be heard by a panel of three judges randomly selected from the court. Either party could then request an en banc hearing before the full court if they disagree with the panel’s decision.

Given the constitutional significance of the case, it’s possible that the losing party at the Eleventh Circuit would seek review by the Supreme Court, regardless of the outcome at the appellate level.

Broader Implications

This ruling has potential far-reaching consequences beyond the Trump case:

• Special Counsel Appointments: If upheld, this decision could invalidate the current method of appointing special counsels, potentially affecting other ongoing investigations.
• Executive Branch Structure: It raises questions about the constitutionality of other positions within the executive branch that are not explicitly created by statute or confirmed by the Senate.
• Congressional Action: The decision may prompt Congress to consider legislation explicitly authorizing and defining the role of special counsels.
• Separation of Powers: The ruling emphasizes strict adherence to constitutional separation of powers, potentially influencing future cases on executive authority.
• Political Ramifications: The dismissal of charges against a former president and current candidate will undoubtedly have significant political repercussions and public debate.

Judge Cannon’s decision highlights the complex interplay between law, politics, and constitutional interpretation in the American system. As the case potentially moves through the appellate process, it will likely continue to spark debate about the proper balance of powers in the federal government and the limits of executive authority.

Typical Car Accident Settlements in Texas

Car accidents can be life-altering events, often resulting in physical injuries, emotional trauma, and significant financial burdens. In the aftermath of a collision, many victims find themselves navigating the complex world of insurance claims and legal proceedings to seek compensation for their losses. For Texas residents, it is important to understand what a fair settlement looks like. It’d be a stretch to say there’s a typical amount or even range, but the information in this post is designed to help you assess whether an offer might be fair in light of other settlements in Texas.

Factors Affecting Typical Car Accident Settlements

There are numerous factors that affect typical car accident settlements in Texas:

• Severity of Injuries: The extent and nature of injuries sustained in the accident play a significant role in determining the settlement amount. More severe injuries that result in long-term disabilities or require extensive medical treatment typically lead to higher settlements.
• Medical Expenses: Both current and future medical costs related to the accident are considered. This includes hospital bills, rehabilitation costs, medication, and any anticipated future medical needs.
• Lost Wages and Earning Capacity: If the accident causes you to miss work or affects your ability to earn income in the future, these losses are factored into the settlement.
• Property Damage: The cost of repairing or replacing your vehicle and any other damaged property is included in the settlement calculation.
• Pain and Suffering: Non-economic damages such as physical pain, emotional distress, and loss of enjoyment of life are considered, though they can be more challenging to quantify.
• Fault Determination: Texas follows a modified comparative fault rule, meaning your settlement may be reduced if you’re found partially at fault for the accident.
• Insurance Coverage: The at-fault party’s insurance policy limits can cap the maximum settlement amount, unless you pursue additional compensation through other means.
• Strength of Evidence: The quality and quantity of evidence supporting your claim, including police reports, witness statements, and expert testimonies, can influence the settlement amount.
• Negotiation Skills: The ability of your attorney to effectively negotiate with the insurance company can impact the final settlement figure.

Rising Values and Decreasing Frequencies

Car accidents have long been a significant concern for drivers and insurers alike, impacting both safety and financial well-being. A recent analysis of data from the Insurance Information Institute (III) reveals notable trends in car accident settlements, focusing on the changing dynamics of claim frequency and severity over the past decade.

Declining Claim Frequencies

From 2013 to 2022, the frequency of claims for both bodily injury and property damage liability has seen a gradual decline. Bodily injury claims per 100 car years have decreased from 0.95 in 2013 to 0.74 in 2022. Similarly, property damage claims dropped from 3.55 to 2.37 over the same period.

What is a Car Year?

A car year is a measurement used in the insurance industry to standardize the exposure of insured vehicles over time. One car year is equivalent to 365 days of insured coverage for one vehicle. Thus, claim frequency per 100 car years is a standardized way to express how often claims are filed, allowing for more accurate comparisons over time and across different datasets.

Increasing Claim Payouts

While the frequency of claims has decreased, the severity—measured by the average payout per claim—has risen significantly.

Trends in Injury Claims

For bodily injury claims, the average amount paid increased from $15,441 in 2013 to $24,211 in 2022.

Trends in Property Damage Claims

Property damage claims have also seen a rise in severity, from $3,231 to $5,313. These increases reflect the growing costs associated with medical care and vehicle repairs.

Collision and comprehensive coverage also exhibit similar trends. The frequency of collision claims has slightly decreased from 5.71 claims per 100 car years in 2013 to 4.88 in 2022. Comprehensive claim frequency, however, has remained relatively stable, with a minor increase from 2.57 to 3.31 over the same period.

The severity of collision claims has seen a notable rise, from $3,144 in 2013 to $5,992 in 2022, indicating higher repair costs. Comprehensive claims have also increased in severity, from $1,621 to $2,738, reflecting the growing expenses associated with more advanced vehicle technologies and parts.

Implications and Insights

These trends highlight a crucial shift in the landscape of car accident settlements. While there are fewer claims being filed, the cost of each claim has risen considerably. This underscores the importance of having adequate insurance coverage to manage the financial burden of accidents effectively.

For drivers, this data serves as a reminder to review and possibly increase their insurance coverage limits to ensure they are adequately protected against these rising costs. Insurers, on the other hand, must continue to adjust their strategies and pricing models to account for these evolving trends.

For more detailed information and to explore the data further, visit the Insurance Information Institute’s archived tables at III Table Archive.

Types of Damages in Car Accident Settlements

Car accident settlements in Texas typically include two main categories of damages:

Economic Damages:

• Medical expenses (past and future)
• Lost wages
• Loss of earning capacity
• Property damage
• Out-of-pocket expenses related to the accident

Non-Economic Damages:

• Pain and suffering
• Emotional distress
• Loss of enjoyment of life
• Loss of consortium (in cases involving spousal relationships)

In rare cases involving extreme negligence or intentional misconduct, punitive damages may also be awarded, though these are not typical in most car accident settlements.

Average Settlement Amounts for Different Types of Accidents

While it’s important to note that every case is unique, and settlement amounts can vary widely, here are some general ranges for different types of car accidents in Texas:

• Minor Accidents with Minimal Injuries: For accidents resulting in minor injuries such as whiplash, bruises, or small cuts, settlements typically range from $10,000 to $25,000. These cases often involve short-term medical treatment and minimal lost wages.
• Moderate Injuries: Accidents causing more significant injuries like fractures, herniated discs, or moderate soft tissue injuries may result in settlements between $50,000 and $100,000. These cases usually involve more extensive medical treatment and longer recovery periods.
• Serious Injuries: Accidents leading to severe injuries such as spinal cord damage, traumatic brain injuries, or injuries requiring surgery can result in settlements ranging from $100,000 to $500,000 or more, depending on the long-term impact and future medical needs.
• Catastrophic Injuries or Fatalities: In cases involving permanent disabilities, life-altering injuries, or wrongful death, settlements can exceed $1 million. These high-value cases often involve complex negotiations and may require litigation.

It’s crucial to remember that these figures are general estimates, and actual settlement amounts can fall outside these ranges based on the specific circumstances of each case.

The Role of Insurance in Texas Car Accident Settlements

Insurance plays a pivotal role in car accident settlements in Texas. The state requires all drivers to carry minimum liability insurance coverage of:

• $30,000 per person for bodily injury
• $60,000 per accident for bodily injury
• $25,000 for property damage

This is often referred to as 30/60/25 coverage. However, these minimums may not be sufficient to cover all damages in serious accidents, which is why many drivers opt for higher coverage limits.

In Texas, you typically file a claim with the at-fault driver’s insurance company. However, if the at-fault driver is uninsured or underinsured, you may need to rely on your own insurance coverage, assuming you have uninsured/underinsured motorist protection.

It’s important to note that insurance companies are businesses focused on minimizing payouts. They may initially offer low settlement amounts, hoping claimants will accept without negotiation. This is why many accident victims choose to work with an attorney who can negotiate more effectively on their behalf. If you’ve been injured in a car accident that was someone else’s fault, call us today at (817) 207-4878.

Invasive Visual Recording in Texas

Defining Invasive Visual Recording Under Texas Law

Invasive visual recording in Texas is a state jail felony defined under Texas Penal Code § 21.15, which prohibits capturing or transmitting visual images of an intimate area of another person without their consent and with intent to invade their privacy. This offense applies to recordings made in places where the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, such as changing rooms or bathrooms. This law also addresses the unauthorized transmission of these images.

Invasive Visual Recording is a State Jail Felony

Invasive visual recording is considered a state jail felony. Conviction can lead to a punishment ranging from 180 days to two years in a state jail and may include fines up to $10,000. This reflects the severe breach of privacy represented by this crime.

Statute of Limitations for Filing Charges in Texas

The statute of limitations for invasive visual recording is three years in Texas. This means legal action must be initiated within three years from the date of the recording to pursue charges against the perpetrator.

Eligibility for Probation in Invasive Visual Recording Cases

Deferred adjudication, probation, and state jail time are all possibilities for Invasive Visual Recording cases in Texas. The terms of probation are contingent on the court’s assessment of the case details, the defendant, and the defendant’s prior criminal record. Probation terms may vary significantly based on these factors.

Sex Offender Registration Requirements

Invasive visual recording does not require an offender to register as a sex offender.

Legal Defenses Against Invasive Visual Recording Charges

Some defenses in cases of invasive visual recording can include demonstrating a lack of intent to invade privacy, showing that the subject had no reasonable expectation of privacy, or proving that the accused believed they had consent to record.

Prohibited Recordings: What You Cannot Capture

Under Texas Penal Code § 21.15(a), it is illegal to record the following without consent:

• Female breast: Any part of the female breast below the top of the areola.
• Intimate area: This includes the genitals, pubic area, anus, buttocks, or female breast, whether clothed or unclothed.
• Changing room: Any area designated for changing clothes, including dressing rooms, locker rooms, and swimwear changing areas.

Learn more: upskirting or downblousing as an offense in Texas.

Related and Similar Charges in Texas

• Voyeurism (Texas Penal Code § 21.17)
• Electronic Transmission of Certain Visual Material Depicting a Minor (Texas Penal Code § 43.261)
• Possession or Promotion of Child Pornography (Texas Penal Code § 43.26)
• Unlawful Disclosure or Promotion of Intimate Visual Material (“Revenge Porn”) (Texas Penal Code § 21.16)
• Harassment (Texas Penal Code § 42.07) – when involving electronic communications of visual material
• Breach of Computer Security (Texas Penal Code § 33.02) – if it involves accessing someone’s device to obtain intimate images
• Stalking (Texas Penal Code § 42.072) – when involving repeated visual recording or surveillance

Contact Us

If you have been charged with Invasive Visual Recording in Tarrant County, Dallas County, or a surrounding county, call us today at (817) 203-2220.