photo credit Roberta Slayton

photo credit Roberta Slayton
AUGUST 2015 – A Midlothian, Texas grandmother took her Ford Expedition to Wal-Mart for a routine oil change. Roberta Slayton’s car had 173,000 miles on the odometer and was in good, solid condition. A Wal-Mart employee crashed her SUV into a wall. The employee stated that the SUV’s throttle stuck, and that he would have injured his colleague if he hadn’t steered toward the wall. The Wal-Mart insurance representatives offered a $3,200 settlement, which does not cover the cost of replacing Ms. Slayton’s vehicle. Initially, she was told that it would take 2-3 weeks for Wal-Mart to investigate to determine liability for the accident. She was advised to contact her insurance company to have her totaled SUV towed from the scene of the accident at her own cost. Eventually, after local news coverage of the story, Wal-Mart offered to pay for a rental vehicle to Ms. Slayton during their investigation. Ms. Slayton relied on her vehicle to make deliveries for her floral business, Flowers by Roberta. 
Legal Commentary
The experienced attorneys at Fears Nachawati represent victims of negligence to ensure that our clients are compensated property for the cost of repairs, lost wages from time missed from work due to an accident, and other expenses related to the incident. This case is a prime example of how important it is to consult with an attorney and to pursue a civil suit when a victim is injured as the result of another responsible party. Although safety precautions were present at the time of this accident, the company responsible for this incident did not offer an equitable initial settlement to the victim. Filing a civil claim in a scenario like this serves as a means for compensation for the pain and suffering the victim experienced. Questions regarding potential civil claims can be directed to the Fears | Nachawati Law Firm by calling our office at +1.866.705.7584.
About the Author
Majed Nachawati is a preeminent personal injury lawyer who represents victims involved in accidents, automobile accidents, wrongful death lawsuits, work place accidents, and products liability claims throughout the United States. Mr. Nachawati has successfully resolved numerous personal injury accident cases with seven and eight figure confidential settlements. He is licensed to practice before the Supreme Court in multiple states across the U.S., and is a member of the Board of Directors for Public Justice, a Leader’s Forum and PAC member of the American Association for Justice. Mr. Nachawati has been recognized as a Super Lawyer by Texas Monthly Magazine for the past six consecutive years. Contact Majed Nachawati through his website at by e-mail or by calling +1.866.705.7584.

 On Wednesday, July 17, 2013, Fears Nachawati Law Firm Counsel Garnett Hendrix, along with his legal team, appeared in the 160th District Court in Dallas County under Presiding Judge, the Honorable Jim Jordan, to litigate for their client; Plaintiff Deron Taylor.
The case of Deron T. Taylor v. Clifton R. Carr and Native Oil Field Services, LLC, developed as a result of a rear-end collision that occurred between Taylor and Carr. On November 3, 2009, the tractor-trailer Carr was operating collided into the posterior end of the flat bed truck that Taylor was operating. As a result of Carr’s negligence to control his speed, yield to the right-of-way, and observe an adequate lookout, Taylor sustained permanent spinal damage upon impact when his vehicle was pushed 260 feet from the point of impact. In addition to spinal damage which has hindered Taylor’s work ability post-collision, Taylor also experienced a concussion, which caused long term, adverse affects on his memory.
Because of Garnett Hendrix’s 30 plus years of acute legal expertise, and the tenured, adept legal research team of paralegals and assistants who support him, the division from Fears Nachawati successfully argued their case in front of a jury, whom of which rendered a verdict of $352,000.00 to be awarded to Taylor as a result of the defendant’s wrongful and negligent conduct to avoid the collision. Included in the amount awarded to Taylor, $270,400.00 was designated to the Plaintiff for loss of future working capacity, and $50,000.00 was allocated for physical pain and mental anguish.
Becoming a victim in an accident can be very physically, emotionally, and financially distressful, especially when it could have been avoided. If you have been injured due to the negligent conduct of others, you may be entitled to pursue a claim against those responsible. Our experienced personal injury attorneys at Fears Nachawati can provide the legal guidance and representation you need to successfully achieve a claim against the responsible party.

About the Attorney



Garnett "Brit" E.Hendrix, Jr. has been practicing law in Texas for over 30 years. He is board certified in personal injury litigation by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization. Brit received his undergraduate degree from Texas Tech University, and earned his Juris Doctorate degree from the University of Texas. Brit is licensed to practice law in the State of Texas and is admitted to the Northern District of Texas.

Last Thursday’s violent bus accident in North Texas raises many factual questions; it raises a number distinct, legal questions, too. For instance, what legal theories may be applicable in this case? There are several possible scenarios to consider:


First, if the driver engaged in careless behavior that influenced his driving, he may be liable for negligence. Conduct such as drinking and driving, texting and driving, speeding, or deliberately ignoring road hazards may constituent the kind of careless behavior tantamount to a breach of duty, giving rise to a victim’s negligent claims.


Second, in a related form of negligence, if the driver or Cardinal Coach Lines, the owner of the bus and the provider of the transportation service, failed to properly maintain the bus, either may be liable for negligence, too. Failing to timely review or replace the bus’s tires, brakes, or vehicle fluids, like transmission fluid, brake fluid or oil, may constitute careless conduct and support a victim’s tort claims.


Finally, the maker of the bus, tires or other component parts may be liable under a different tort theory: product liability. If the company responsible for these parts designed, manufactured, or marketed dangerous injury-causing parts or products, these indirectly related parties could be liable, too.


Are these legal theories relevant in the Cardinal Coach Lines accident that injured your loved one? A full investigation by attorneys and legal professionals may be necessary to answer this important question. If you’d like the experienced, dedicated attorneys at the Dallas law firm of Fears | Nachawati to examine these matters for you and your family, contact us today. For your free consultation, email us at or call 1.866.705.7584. We’re ready to advise you and your loved ones.

 Zachary Pope, 6, is recovering steadily in a Lubbock, Texas hospital after sustaining serious burns to his face and upper body. Although his mother and brother were able to escape the house fire with only minor burns, Zachary suffered considerable injury before finally reaching safety. Over the last two weeks, he’s undergone skin grafts on his arms, thighs, chest and face.


Fires cause burn injuries to thousands of Texans every year. Tragically, in many cases these fires are preventable and would not occur but for the negligence of landlords. If you’re apartment has caught fire recently, you may have a cause of action against the owner of the facility for unsafe premises. To find out more about what your next steps should be, contact the personal injury professionals at Fears | Nachawati. Give us a call at 1.866.705.7584 or send an email to We can help you!

Last week, the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling released its final report on the catastrophic spill. The Commission found that the Deepwater Horizon disaster was foreseeable and preventable. Specifically, errors by the responsible companies – BP, Halliburton, and Transocean – included inadequate safety procedures, failure to respond to repeatedly demonstrated problems, and ineffective response to the blowout once it began. 

Thousands of Texans work in the oil and gas industry. As the Commission’s findings suggest, the oil and gas companies who employ these hard-working Texans routinely dismiss safety concerns, putting their front-line employees at significant risk. Unfortunately, workers – like the men working the Deepwater Horizon – pay the price for this corporate neglect. 

To speak with an attorney specializing in occupational injuries and oil and gas industry negligence, contact Fears | Nachawati. For a free consultation, give us a call at 1.866.705.7584 or send an email to We’re ready to help you!

A man died earlier this week in the pharmacy of John Peter Smith hospital in Fort Worth.  Witnesses report that the man was discovered slumped over in a chair.  Help was called, but medical personnel did not arrive for at least ten minutes.  When help did arrive, a non-functional defibrillator was first used on the victim but apparently it was not charged up.  Emergency responders then tried to use a second defibrillator, which also did not work.  Medical workers then tried CPR and took the man away from the pharmacy for further treatment.  Their attempts to revive the man were unsuccessful.

If you or a loved one has been injured or hurt on someone else’s property, you may have legal rights.  Call Fears | Nachawati today to discuss your potential case.  1.866.705.7584. 

Duty of care is a duty imposed by the law on every person to behave with the caution that a reasonable and prudent person would exercise under the same circumstances. In order to successfully prove negligence in a Texas personal injury lawsuit, you must first prove that the defendant owed you a duty of care and that the duty of care was breached.

We all owe a general duty of care to the public and those around us. There is no requirement that you be contractually bound to another person in some way before you owe them a duty of care. Rather, the duty of care is automatic and owed by all of us to anyone who may be affected by our actions.

If you have been the victim of an accident caused by the negligence of a third party, contact Fears | Nachawati today. You will receive free legal advice from a Texas personal injury lawyer who can answer all of your questions about the litigation process. You can email us at or call us on our toll-free number at 1.866.705.7584.


Who was at fault? It’s the most basic, and most important, question that must be answered if you have been in a car accident. The person who is at fault is the person whose negligence caused the accident – and the person who is going to have to pay for the damages. Sounds pretty simple, right?

Well, sometimes fault can be a tricky thing. It is not uncommon for both drivers to have played a role in causing the car accident. When a victim’s own actions contributed to their accident, it’s known as contributory negligence. The question that must then be decided is whether the victim’s contributory negligence should prevent them from being able to recover damages.

To answer that question, Texas uses the proportional comparative fault at 51% rule. If you are involved in a car accident in Texas, you cannot recover damages from the other party if you are 51% or more at fault for the accident. The proportional degree of fault is usually decided by the insurance company adjusters.

You do not have to go through the insurance claim adjustment process alone. An experienced Texas personal injury lawyer can go to work for you to ensure that all of the evidence of fault is fairly and accurately presented. If you have been involved in a Texas car accident, contact Fears | Nachawati today to help ensure your ability to recover damages from the responsible party.

To receive free legal advice about your car accident, email us at or call us on our toll-free number at 1.866.705.7584.  



The reasonable person is a legal fiction. It is a hypothetical person who uses average care, judgment and skills in conducting themselves. We use the reasonable person standard to determine whether a person’s conduct was negligent in a given set of circumstances. Typically a person is negligent if they fail to behave the way a reasonable person would under those same circumstances.

In general, negligence relates to a defendant’s actions rather than their state of mind. Therefore, we need a way to decide if those actions were reasonable. The reasonable person standard provides courts and juries with an objective test that can be used to decide whether a person’s actions constitute negligence.

The reasonable person isn’t perfect. A reasonable person is allowed to make mistakes in perception and errors of judgment – but only if that mistake or error was reasonable under the circumstances. If the mistake was consistent with exercising ordinary care, then making that mistake does not constitute negligence.

The reasonable person standard frequently comes into play in Texas personal injury lawsuits because most personal injury lawsuits are based on negligence. If you have been injured due to someone’s negligence, contact Fears | Nachawati to speak with a Texas personal injury lawyer. Just email us at or call our toll-free number at 1.866.705.7584.



The O.J. Simpson criminal case and subsequent wrongful death lawsuit left many people confused. You can be tried for murder and then, even if you’re found innocent, be sued for the person’s death?

It does sound a lot like double jeopardy, and the 5th amendment states we cannot be tried for the same crime twice. The difference in O.J. Simpson’s case, and in cases like his, is that he wasn’t being tried twice for a crime. Murder is a crime, while wrongful death, on the other hand, is a tort. One was a criminal case and one was a civil lawsuit.

Murder is a type of wrongful death, but not all wrongful deaths are murders. For example, a patient may die because of a doctor’s negligence, which is malpractice. The doctor didn’t murder the patient, but the doctor can still be sued for wrongful death.

Murder is an intentional act, while some wrongful deaths are the result of an accident. For instance, if ABC Grocery Store neglects to clean up a puddle of water down one of the aisles, and a person slips, hits their head on the ground and dies as a result, ABC has not committed murder. They may be found responsible for the death in a civil lawsuit because they were negligent in failing to mop up the puddle, but they the store obviously didn’t intend for someone to be killed.

Another major difference between murder and wrongful death is that murder charges are brought by the state against the defendant, not by the victim of the crime. On the other hand, the family members of a wrongful death victim are the ones who initiate a wrongful death lawsuit.

Also, a murder conviction can (and usually does) result in a prison sentence or, in more rare instances, the death penalty. A defendant in a wrongful death lawsuit is punished by having to pay the victim’s family members a certain amount of financial compensation.

Fears | Nachawati is a team of Texas wrongful death lawyers who help the families of deceased accident victims. If you have lost a loved one in an accident, contact us today for free legal assistance. You can contact us by email us at or call us on our toll-free number at 1.866.705.7584.