Maida Law Firm News & Accident Lawyer Updates

Because a reported incident is a concrete way to explain what the law actually does — which duty applied, what deadline runs, what evidence matters — in a situation readers recognise. A page of abstract statements about Texas negligence law helps almost nobody; the same statement attached to a real intersection and a real sequence of events is considerably more useful. The line we hold is that the commentary is about the legal position generally, and never a claim about who was at fault in the specific incident.

No, and that is a rule rather than a preference. Texas disciplinary rules restrict targeted solicitation of accident victims, and the practice is objectionable independently of the rules — people recovering from a serious crash should not be receiving approaches from firms that read about them. These entries are written about the law and addressed to whoever is reading the page, not to anyone in particular. If you were involved in something reported here and want to talk, the initiative is yours and the consultation is free.

By subject and by verification. The subject has to be a road or workplace incident of a kind this firm handles, in the Houston area, where there is something substantive to say about the law. Then every candidate is fetched and checked before publication — the URL must resolve, the outlet must be identified accurately, and the item must actually report what the entry says it reports. An item that fails any of those is dropped rather than published with a caveat.

The entry is corrected or removed. Early reporting on a crash is frequently incomplete and sometimes wrong — an initial account of who ran a light can change once an investigation concludes. Because our entries link to the original rather than reproducing it, a reader can always see the current version at the source. Where an item is materially wrong, or the link dies, it comes down. Leaving an inaccurate item in place because it is old is not a defensible position for a page about the law.

Because the reporting is the outlet's work and the reader should be able to see it. Summarising someone else's article at length, without sending anyone to it, is a practice that benefits the summariser and nobody else. Linking also makes the entry checkable, which is the same principle applied everywhere on this site: statutes link to the State of Texas's published text, and figures link to the source document. An assertion nobody can verify is not much use.

On a regular schedule, from sources checked at the time of publication rather than from a stored list. The job that produces them fails closed by design: if the source list cannot be read, or if too few items can be verified, it publishes nothing rather than publishing something unchecked. That is a deliberate trade — an empty week is a much smaller problem than an entry that says something untrue about a real incident.

Established local outlets covering the region — ABC13 / KTRK, KPRC 2 / Click2Houston, FOX 26 Houston and similar — because those organisations have reporters at scenes and relationships with the investigating agencies. We do not aggregate from content farms or from other law firms' pages, both of which recirculate second-hand accounts with errors intact. The outlet is named on every entry so the reader can weigh the source themselves.

Nothing on this page is advice about your situation, and you should not act on a general statement of law without someone looking at your facts. What is worth doing immediately, regardless of who you speak to, is preserving evidence: camera footage near the scene routinely overwrites within days, and vehicles are repaired or scrapped. Beyond that, the deadlines are two years from accrual under § 16.003(a) and only six months for written notice if a governmental unit was involved under § 101.101.

Because general tips are indistinguishable from every other law firm's general tips, and readers can tell. An entry that says what happened, links to the reporting, and explains which Texas duty or deadline the situation engages is doing something a reader cannot easily get elsewhere. It is also honest about its limits — it is commentary on the law, not an investigation, and it does not pretend to know more about an incident than the reporting does.

The consultation is free, there is no obligation, and the office is at 8313 Southwest Fwy Ste 102, Houston, TX 77074, open Monday to Friday from 8:00 to 17:00. If a matter is outside what this firm handles, you will be told that rather than signed up — which is a normal outcome of a first call and a more useful one than the alternative.