Call Now
713-521-0059
Sometimes. It depends on who ran the building that night and what they knew. A stadium, arena or concert venue owes you protection from the criminal acts of others only where the risk was foreseeable and unreasonable. A venue with a history of assaults in the same garage, restroom corridor or standing-room section, that then cut security or left the area unwatched, can be responsible. So can a promoter, a security contractor or a concessionaire whose own conduct created the risk. Schiffer Law Firm in Houston represents survivors in these cases across Texas.
The step that cannot wait is the video. Stadiums and arenas run hundreds of cameras and keep the footage for a fixed period, often measured in days. Ticket scans, incident reports, guard post logs and ejection records are on the same clock. Call 713-521-0059 so written notice to keep the footage can go out before it is overwritten.
Texas courts start from the rule that a person has no legal duty to protect another from the criminal acts of a third person. The exception is foreseeability. Timberwalk Apartments Partners, Inc. v. Cain, 972 S.W.2d 749 (Tex. 1998), lists the factors: whether crime previously occurred on or near the property, how recently, how often, how similar, and how publicized. Del Lago Partners, Inc. v. Smith, 307 S.W.3d 762 (Tex. 2010), holds those factors are not the only way a crime can be foreseeable. Del Lago itself was a resort bar where staff watched hostilities build for ninety minutes before the fight.
UDR Texas Properties, L.P. v. Petrie, 517 S.W.3d 98 (Tex. 2017), adds the second half of the test. Foreseeability “is the beginning, not the end, of the analysis” of the duty, the court wrote. A risk is unreasonable “when the risk of a foreseeable crime outweighs the burden placed on property owners” to prevent it. A venue that already employs security, controls entry and monitors cameras will be asked what one more guard at a known trouble spot would have cost. That evidence is what Petrie requires, and it is ours to produce.
The practical questions are these. What incident reports did the venue have for that section, that corridor or that garage before your assault? What did its security plan call for, and was it staffed that night? Where were the cameras, and who was watching them? What happened after you reported, and how long did it take?
This is where a stadium case differs from a hotel or apartment case. Many Texas stadiums and arenas are owned by a city, a county or a sports authority. Section 101.0215 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code lists “civic, convention centers, or coliseums” and “parking facilities” among a municipality’s governmental functions. That places them under the Texas Tort Claims Act. Section 101.021 waives immunity only for injury caused by the use of a motor-driven vehicle or by “a condition or use of tangible personal or real property.” Section 101.022 limits the duty owed for a premises defect to the duty owed a licensee unless the claimant paid the governmental unit for the use of its premises. Who sold your ticket, and who received the money, is one of the first questions.
Section 101.057(2) provides that the Act does not apply to a claim “arising out of assault, battery, false imprisonment, or any other intentional tort.” In Delaney v. University of Houston, 835 S.W.2d 56 (Tex. 1992), the Texas Supreme Court read that exclusion as reaching intentional torts by government employees. It held that a student’s claim about a broken dormitory lock her attacker came through was not barred by it. So a claim against a public owner is possible. But it has to be about a condition of the building the owner controlled and failed to fix, not about guards it did not post. Written notice must reach the governmental unit within six months under Section 101.101, and a city charter can require less. Houston’s charter requires notice within 90 days.
In practice the stronger claim usually lies against the private parties who ran the event. The team or promoter that leased the building. The security contractor that staffed it. The concessionaire that overserved. Where the assailant was an employee, the company that hired and supervised him. Those defendants are not governmental units, and the Tort Claims Act does not protect them. Our page on who is responsible when a sexual assault happens on property explains how the claim against each is built.
Then you have two claims. The first is against the person. The second is against the employer for its own negligence in hiring, training, supervising or retaining him. That claim does not depend on whether the assault was part of his job. A guard company that put a man with a record at a post where he searched fans alone, or a venue that kept an usher on after complaints, is the case.
For the offenses listed in Section 16.0045(b) of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, which include sexual assault of an adult, you have five years. For the child sexual abuse offenses listed in Section 16.0045(a), thirty years. Section 16.0045(d) tolls the period when a petition names an unknown assailant as John or Jane Doe, provided you proceed with diligence to identify him and amend within thirty days once you do. That matters in a crowd case where he was never identified. Claims against the venue for its own negligence may run on a different clock. The video is gone long before any of them run. Our page on how long you have to sue goes through each one.
Every statute and case linked above was read at its primary source. Texas statutes change every legislative session and case law is constantly changing.
This page is general information about Texas law. It is not legal advice about your situation, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship.
The venue holds all of it. The first step is written notice to keep the evidence, and it goes to the owner, the operator, the promoter and the security contractor.
We start by finding out who controlled the building that night, because in a stadium case the right defendant is often not the name on the building. Then the first step is written notice to each of them before the video cycles, and we obtain the incident history that shows what the venue knew.
Schiffer Law Firm is a Houston personal injury firm with 50 plus years of combined experience representing injured people and survivors across Texas.
If you are an advocate or a counselor asking on someone’s behalf, you are welcome to call with a general question. We will not ask you for their name.
There is no charge to talk, and no attorney’s fee unless there is a recovery.
Call 713-521-0059.
Sometimes. The venue is responsible where the risk was foreseeable and unreasonable, which usually means prior incidents it knew about and security it did not provide. The claim is against the parties that controlled the building that night, and the video that proves it is kept for days, not months.
No, but it narrows the claim against the city to a condition of the building it controlled and failed to fix, as in Delaney v. University of Houston, with notice due within six months under state law and within 90 days under Houston's charter. The private team, promoter, security contractor or concessionaire that ran the event has no such protection.
The claim against the venue does not depend on identifying him. Section 16.0045(d) tolls the limitations period on the assault claim when a petition names the unknown assailant as John or Jane Doe, provided you proceed with diligence to identify him.
Not on request, which is why written notice to keep the footage comes first and a lawsuit can compel production. Most venues overwrite footage on a fixed cycle, so the letter has to arrive before the cycle does.
Five years for the offenses listed in Section 16.0045(b), which include sexual assault of an adult, and thirty years for the child offenses in Section 16.0045(a), measured from accrual. The claims against the venue may run on a different clock. Ask about your dates.