The drunk driver was already convicted. Do I still have to prove fault in my civil case?

The criminal conviction under Tex. Penal Code §49.04, §49.07, or §49.08 is admissible in the civil case as evidence of negligence per se in many circumstances, and as substantial evidence of intoxication in others. It does not automatically establish all elements — you still prove causation and damages. But the conviction makes the fault question much narrower, and in clear-liability cases with a DWI conviction, the dispute typically shifts to damages.

The criminal court ordered restitution. Doesn't that cover my damages?

No. Criminal restitution is limited in scope, often capped, and typically focuses on out-of-pocket economic loss. The civil claim is broader — it covers past and future medical expenses, lost earning capacity, pain and suffering, mental anguish, and impairment. A criminal restitution order does not preclude or set the value of the civil claim. The two run in parallel.

Can the bar that over-served the drunk driver be sued?

Yes — under Tex. Alcoholic Beverage Code §2.02, an establishment can be liable when serving alcohol to an obviously intoxicated person who presented a clear danger to themselves or others, and that intoxication proximately caused the harm. The 'obviously intoxicated' standard is the threshold. Surveillance footage of the driver's condition before leaving, drink-receipt timing, and witness testimony from servers and other patrons build the §2.02 case.

What about exemplary (punitive) damages — are those available in DWI civil cases?

DWI gross-negligence cases are the textbook fact pattern for exemplary damages. Under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §41.001 and §41.003, exemplary damages may be awarded when the claimant proves by clear and convincing evidence that the harm resulted from gross negligence — and operating a vehicle while intoxicated is a recurring example. The §41.008 cap still applies (the greater of $200,000 or two times economic damages plus an equal amount of noneconomic damages up to $750,000), unless one of the §41.008(c) felony exceptions triggers, including intoxication manslaughter under §49.08.

Do I need to wait for the criminal case to conclude before filing my civil claim?

No, and waiting is often the wrong move. The two-year deadline under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §16.003 runs from the date of the crash, not from the conclusion of the criminal case. Criminal cases involving DWI commonly take a year or longer; running parallel civil discovery while the criminal case proceeds usually preserves evidence and witness availability. The criminal proceeding can affect civil discovery timing, but it doesn't pause the deadline.

What if the drunk driver had no insurance, or only minimum-limits coverage?

Your own UM/UIM coverage under Tex. Ins. Code §1952.101 becomes the primary recovery path. Texas requires insurers to offer UM/UIM unless the named insured rejects it in writing. If the drunk driver was uninsured or carried only the $30,000 state minimum, UM/UIM stacking and §2.02 dram shop claims against the serving establishment are the additional recovery tracks worth investigating early.

Austin Drunk Driving Accident Lawyer

On this page

Do you have a drunk-driving accident case?

If a drunk driver caused your crash in Travis or Williamson County, you almost certainly have a strong case — and the procedural and damages landscape differs substantively from an ordinary auto crash. Texas treats intoxication-related driving offenses under Tex. Penal Code §49.04, §49.07, and §49.08, and the criminal track typically runs in parallel with the civil claim. The two-year deadline under Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code §16.003 still applies; the work in the first weeks builds the parallel-track strategy and the §2.02 dram shop investigation.

We handle drunk-driving crash representation across Austin and the surrounding counties. The pages that follow walk through the Texas-specific framework that governs DWI civil cases, the dram-shop liability path against establishments that over-served the at-fault driver, the geography of where these cases concentrate in Austin, and the process from first call through resolution.

What to do in the next 24 hours

Before anything else, before calling any attorney:

See a doctor today, even if you feel fine. DWI-impact injuries are commonly delayed-onset. A same-day medical record anchors your timeline against an inevitable defense argument that your injuries came from somewhere other than the crash.
Photograph everything. Vehicle damage, the scene, the other driver if they're still on scene and visibly impaired, debris field, skid marks, traffic-control devices.
Note observations of the driver. If you saw the at-fault driver before they were arrested — odor of alcohol, slurred speech, instability, an open container, statements they made — write it down with the time and location. Criminal-process witnesses become civil-case witnesses.
Request the police report and arrest report. Both. The crash report (CR-3) and the DWI arrest paperwork document different facts. The arrest paperwork includes BAC results, field sobriety test results, and officer observations that frame the §41.003 gross-negligence theory in the civil case.
Identify the establishment if known. If the driver was coming from a bar, restaurant, or any licensed establishment that served them, write down the name and approximate departure time. The §2.02 dram shop investigation starts there.
Don't talk to the at-fault driver's insurer. Their carrier moves fast in DWI cases because the criminal exposure is high and the civil settlement leverage is asymmetric. A recorded statement is rarely in your interest.
Save every receipt. ER discharge, prescriptions, mileage to and from appointments, repair estimates, vehicle towing, lost-wage documentation. Keep one folder.

None of the above requires an attorney. It costs nothing. It is the single most useful thing you can do in the first day.

What makes a Texas DWI case different

Three legal frameworks shape every drunk-driving civil case in Texas, and each affects strategy from the first conversation.

Criminal-civil parallel tracks. A DWI criminal case under Tex. Penal Code §49.04 (DWI), §49.07 (intoxication assault for serious bodily injury), or §49.08 (intoxication manslaughter for death) runs alongside the civil claim. The criminal track produces evidence the civil case can use — BAC results, field sobriety test failures, the arrest report, the officer's body-worn camera footage, witness statements taken at the scene, the chemical-test refusal record if applicable. A DWI conviction is admissible in the civil case as substantial evidence of negligence, in some cases as negligence per se. The civil case's damages model is broader than criminal restitution can ever cover.

Dram shop liability under Tex. Alcoholic Beverage Code §2.02. Texas imposes liability on alcohol providers (bars, restaurants, hosts in narrow circumstances) when they served a person who was obviously intoxicated and presenting a clear danger, and that intoxication proximately caused the harm. The §2.02 cause of action expands the defendant pool beyond the at-fault driver to include the establishment. Investigation focuses on point-of-sale data, drink-tab timing, surveillance footage of the driver's condition before leaving, server training records, the establishment's prior over-service incidents, and witness testimony from the servers, bartenders, and other patrons. Many DWI civil cases turn on a §2.02 defendant because the at-fault driver's personal policy is exhausted at the state minimum.

Exemplary damages under §41.001 and §41.003. Operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated is a recurring example of gross negligence. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §41.001 defines the relevant terms; §41.003 sets the clear-and-convincing standard for awarding exemplary damages on a gross-negligence finding. The §41.008 cap applies to most cases; the §41.008(c) felony exception removes the cap when the conduct constitutes one of the listed Penal Code felonies, which include §49.08 intoxication manslaughter. The exemplary-damages component is what creates the settlement pressure in many DWI civil cases.

Investigating Austin Dram Shop liability. A §2.02 case lives or dies on point-of-sale evidence. Austin's downtown entertainment-district establishments (Sixth Street, Rainey Street, Red River, the Warehouse District) typically run digital POS systems with timestamped drink tabs and TABC-mandated server-training records on a 60–90-day retention cycle. Surveillance video at most venues overwrites within 30 days. Preservation letters in the first week — to the establishment, to the building's surveillance contractor, and to any adjacent-business cameras with sight lines onto the bar's exterior — are what keep the §2.02 case alive. The same letters request the server's TABC certification number, the shift roster, and any prior over-service incident reports the establishment is required to maintain.

Texas law that governs recovery

The framework most often invoked in a Texas drunk-driving civil case:

Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §16.003 — two-year statute of limitations for personal injury and wrongful death.
Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §33.001 — modified comparative responsibility; recovery barred at 51% fault.
Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §41.001 — definitions of "claimant," "clear and convincing," "exemplary damages," "gross negligence," and related terms.
Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §41.003 — standard for awarding exemplary damages: clear-and-convincing evidence of fraud, malice, or gross negligence.
Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §41.008 — caps on exemplary damages, with §41.008(c) exceptions for listed Penal Code felonies including §49.08 intoxication manslaughter.
Tex. Penal Code §49.04 — DWI offense; intoxicated operation of a motor vehicle in a public place.
Tex. Penal Code §49.07 — intoxication assault; intoxicated operation causing serious bodily injury.
Tex. Penal Code §49.08 — intoxication manslaughter; intoxicated operation causing death.
Tex. Alcoholic Beverage Code §2.02 — dram shop cause of action against providers who served obviously intoxicated persons presenting a clear danger.
Tex. Insurance Code §1952.101 — UM/UIM coverage requirement for automobile liability policies.
Haygood v. De Escabedo (Tex. 2011) — paid-or-incurred rule limiting past medical recovery.

For wrongful-death cases, §71.004 statutory beneficiaries (spouse, children, parents) have separate recovery rights distinct from the survival action.

Where Austin DWI accidents happen

DWI crash density in Austin tracks the late-night entertainment-district closing-time corridors, plus the highway commute home from those districts.

Sixth Street, Rainey Street, Red River entertainment districts. The bulk of Austin DWI cases originate from these blocks. Crashes typically occur within a 2-mile radius of the district as drivers leave between 11 PM and 2:30 AM. The §2.02 dram shop investigation targets establishments in these districts.

East Austin warehouse districts. Live-music venues and late-night bars on East 6th, Cesar Chavez east of I-35, and the warehouse-conversion venues in the East Cesar Chavez area produce a distinct DWI crash pattern.

The South Lamar / Zilker corridor. South Austin entertainment cluster including South Lamar bars, restaurants on Barton Springs, and the Zilker-area venues. Crashes concentrate on South Lamar, Barton Springs Road, and the Lamar-to-MoPac connector during late evening and early morning hours.

Highway-segment fatality crashes. The §49.08 intoxication manslaughter fact pattern most commonly arises on I-35 (north and south corridors), MoPac (Loop 1), and US 183 — wrong-way and high-speed DWI fatalities concentrate on these limited-access highways. Travis County District Court handles Travis-located crashes; Williamson County District Court handles crashes north of the county line.

Round Rock and Cedar Park return commutes. DWI crashes on the I-35 north corridor between downtown and Round Rock, and on US 183 between downtown and Cedar Park, follow the entertainment-to-suburb commute pattern. Williamson County venue.

What is recoverable

A drunk-driving civil claim in Texas typically covers:

Past and future medical expenses (subject to Haygood paid-or-incurred).
Past and future lost earnings and lost earning capacity.
Physical pain and mental anguish.
Physical impairment and disfigurement.
Property damage to the vehicle and personal property inside it.
Loss of consortium in spousal and certain family contexts.
Exemplary (punitive) damages under §41.001 and §41.003, capped under §41.008 except where the §41.008(c) felony exception removes the cap (notably for §49.08 intoxication manslaughter).

For wrongful death cases, the §71.004 statutory beneficiaries have separate recovery rights distinct from the survival action.

What the process looks like

Most drunk-driving civil cases run in four overlapping phases.

1. Intake and conflict check. First call covers the facts, the injury, the criminal-case status, the insurance landscape (the at-fault driver's policy + your UM/UIM + any §2.02 dram shop defendants), and a conflict check.

2. Investigation and parallel-track coordination. Spoliation letters to all carriers and any establishment under §2.02 investigation. Dram-shop investigation: point-of-sale data, surveillance footage preservation, server training records, prior-incident discovery. Criminal-case monitoring — the criminal court's docket affects civil discovery timing. Treating-doctor records build over the next 60-180 days.

3. Demand and negotiation. When treatment plateaus and the criminal case has produced its evidentiary record, the demand package goes to the at-fault driver's carrier and any §2.02 dram shop defendants. Cases with a criminal conviction and a viable §2.02 claim often resolve pre-suit because of the exemplary-damages exposure.

4. Suit, discovery, and trial preparation. When carriers won't move, suit is filed in Travis or Williamson County District Court. Discovery scope: criminal-case records, dram-shop establishment records, the driver's prior-DWI history, and the establishment's prior over-service history. Mediation typically occurs 60-90 days before trial.

Why this firm

Direct attorney access. When you call us, you reach an attorney, not an intake coordinator routing you to a paralegal. Anselmo Aguirre handles your case personally — intake, investigation, negotiation, and trial.

Smaller caseload than the firms that advertise on the freeway. We turn down cases for conflict, for fit, and when another firm is a better match for the facts. The cases we take get attention, not assembly-line treatment.

Real Texas-specific work. Statutes by section, hospitals by name, courts by location. The pages on this site are the firm's own analysis, reviewed by Anselmo Aguirre — not borrowed from a content mill.

Frequently asked questions

The drunk driver was already convicted. Do I still have to prove fault in my civil case?: The criminal conviction under Tex. Penal Code §49.04, §49.07, or §49.08 is admissible in the civil case as evidence of negligence per se in many circumstances, and as substantial evidence of intoxication in others. It does not automatically establish all elements — you still prove causation and damages. But the conviction makes the fault question much narrower, and in clear-liability cases with a DWI conviction, the dispute typically shifts to damages.
The criminal court ordered restitution. Doesn't that cover my damages?: No. Criminal restitution is limited in scope, often capped, and typically focuses on out-of-pocket economic loss. The civil claim is broader — it covers past and future medical expenses, lost earning capacity, pain and suffering, mental anguish, and impairment. A criminal restitution order does not preclude or set the value of the civil claim. The two run in parallel.
Can the bar that over-served the drunk driver be sued?: Yes — under Tex. Alcoholic Beverage Code §2.02, an establishment can be liable when serving alcohol to an obviously intoxicated person who presented a clear danger to themselves or others, and that intoxication proximately caused the harm. The 'obviously intoxicated' standard is the threshold. Surveillance footage of the driver's condition before leaving, drink-receipt timing, and witness testimony from servers and other patrons build the §2.02 case.
What about exemplary (punitive) damages — are those available in DWI civil cases?: DWI gross-negligence cases are the textbook fact pattern for exemplary damages. Under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §41.001 and §41.003, exemplary damages may be awarded when the claimant proves by clear and convincing evidence that the harm resulted from gross negligence — and operating a vehicle while intoxicated is a recurring example. The §41.008 cap still applies (the greater of $200,000 or two times economic damages plus an equal amount of noneconomic damages up to $750,000), unless one of the §41.008(c) felony exceptions triggers, including intoxication manslaughter under §49.08.
Do I need to wait for the criminal case to conclude before filing my civil claim?: No, and waiting is often the wrong move. The two-year deadline under Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §16.003 runs from the date of the crash, not from the conclusion of the criminal case. Criminal cases involving DWI commonly take a year or longer; running parallel civil discovery while the criminal case proceeds usually preserves evidence and witness availability. The criminal proceeding can affect civil discovery timing, but it doesn't pause the deadline.
What if the drunk driver had no insurance, or only minimum-limits coverage?: Your own UM/UIM coverage under Tex. Ins. Code §1952.101 becomes the primary recovery path. Texas requires insurers to offer UM/UIM unless the named insured rejects it in writing. If the drunk driver was uninsured or carried only the $30,000 state minimum, UM/UIM stacking and §2.02 dram shop claims against the serving establishment are the additional recovery tracks worth investigating early.