Call Now
713-521-0059
Often, yes. A youth center, a boys and girls club, a mentoring program, a scouting troop, a church youth group or an after-school program can be liable when its own choices made the abuse possible. It accepted a volunteer it should have screened out. It ignored a complaint. It let an adult be alone with your child when its own rules said no. It left an older child alone with a younger one after it had been warned. The claim is against the organization for what it did and did not do. It is separate from the claim against the person who committed the abuse. Schiffer Law Firm in Houston represents survivors and families in these cases across Texas.
The step that cannot wait is the record. Sign-in sheets, volunteer applications, background checks, incident reports, emails and texts with parents, and the program’s own written rules are the evidence. The organization holds most of it. Call 713-521-0059 before it is thrown out or overwritten.
Your claim is built on negligence, not on the abuse alone. Texas courts apply a general rule that a person has no legal duty to protect another from the criminal acts of a third person. The exceptions turn on what the defendant knew and controlled. For property owners, Timberwalk Apartments Partners, Inc. v. Cain, 972 S.W.2d 749 (Tex. 1998), lists the foreseeability factors: prior crime on or near the property, how recent, how often, how similar, and how publicized.
A youth organization usually stands closer to responsibility than a landlord does. It chose the adults. It wrote the rules. It supervised the children. So the questions are practical. Did the program run a background check before the adult started, and did it act on what it found? Did it have a rule against one adult being alone with one child, and did it enforce it? When you, your child or another volunteer raised a concern, what did the program do that day, and what did it write down? Did the same adult have a history at another program that one phone call would have revealed? Where the abuse came from another child, did the program know that child needed closer supervision, and did it provide it?
A pattern of ignored warnings is what turns a program’s failure into liability. A single act by an adult with a clean record, in a program that followed its rules, is a much harder case. We will tell you which one you have.
The organization’s duty is the same. Children abuse other children, and a program that takes custody of children has to supervise them with that risk in mind. It has to watch the older child who is always with the younger ones, the sleeping arrangements on a trip, the bathroom, the bus, the closed door and the unsupervised hour before pickup. It has to act when a child, a parent or a staff member reports something, and it has to protect the child who was hurt and the other children in the program from a repeat. A program that was told, or should have seen, and did nothing is responsible for what followed.
The claim is built the same way. What did the program know about the child who did it? What rules did it have for supervising children together, and were they followed that day? What did it do when it first heard? The age of the child who committed the abuse can affect the claim against that child and that child’s family. It does not change what the organization owed yours. How the limitations period in Section 16.0045 applies when the person who did it was a child is a question we answer for your facts, not one to assume either way.
Yes, in two directions. Chapter 84 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code is the Charitable Immunity and Liability Act. Section 84.003 defines the organizations it covers: those exempt under Section 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4) and organized for the purposes it lists, and bona fide charitable, religious, youth sports and youth recreational and similar organizations that meet the tests it sets out. The words “youth sports and youth recreational” appear in the definition. Section 84.006 limits a qualifying organization’s liability for bodily injury or death to $500,000 for each person and $1,000,000 for each occurrence. Section 84.004 gives a volunteer immunity for acts within the scope of the volunteer’s duties. Section 84.007(g) adds a condition that is easy to miss: the cap does not apply to an organization that does not carry liability insurance in at least those amounts.
The other direction is Section 84.007(a). The chapter “does not apply to an act or omission that is intentional, wilfully negligent, or done with conscious indifference or reckless disregard for the safety of others.” Abuse itself is intentional. A program that kept an adult on after a credible complaint, or skipped the screening its own policy required, faces the argument that its conduct was more than ordinary negligence. The cap and the volunteer immunity both turn on that question. Section 84.007(c) also removes the cap from an organization “formed substantially to limit its liability under this chapter.”
Whether the cap applies is decided on the facts, starting with the organization’s insurance and its conduct. Do not assume from the word nonprofit that your case is small, and do not assume it is large.
In Texas, every adult does. Section 261.101(a) of the Family Code provides that “a person having reasonable cause to believe that a child’s physical or mental health or welfare has been adversely affected by abuse or neglect by any person shall immediately make a report” as the subchapter provides. Professionals, a defined term that includes teachers, nurses, doctors and day-care employees, must report within 24 hours of first having reasonable cause under Section 261.101(b). They may not delegate the report to someone else. The duty is written in terms of abuse “by any person.” It applies when the abuser was another child.
A program that received a report and did nothing has a problem beyond your civil case. Knowing failure to report is a criminal offense under Section 261.109. In the civil case, the program’s failure to act on what it was told is often the clearest evidence of what it knew.
It depends on the conduct. Section 16.0045(a) of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code gives thirty years where the injury arises from conduct that violates the child sexual abuse provisions it lists, including indecency with a child. Section 16.0045(b) gives five years for the offenses it lists, which include sexual assault of an adult. Both run from accrual, and a claim that belonged to a child is treated differently from one that belonged to an adult. Our pages on how long you have to sue and childhood sexual abuse civil claims go through it.
Section 16.0045(d) also tolls the period when a petition names an unknown defendant as John or Jane Doe, provided you proceed with diligence to identify the person. That matters when the abuser has not yet been identified.
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.
These records decide the case, and the defendant holds them. The first step is written notice to keep them, before a file is cleaned out or an email account is closed.
We start with the history of the person responsible, adult or child, and with the program’s rules, because your case is built on what the organization knew and what it should have done. Then we identify every responsible party: the program, a parent organization or national body that set the screening rules, and the owner of the property where it happened.
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 a parent, 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.
Often, yes. The claim is for the organization's own negligence in screening, supervising or responding to complaints. A volunteer has immunity under Section 84.004 for acts within the scope of the volunteer's duties, but Section 84.007 removes it for intentional or reckless conduct, and the organization's own conduct is judged separately.
Section 84.006 caps a qualifying charitable organization at $500,000 per person and $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury or death, but only if the organization carries liability insurance in at least those amounts under Section 84.007(g). Section 84.007(a) removes the cap for conduct that is intentional, wilfully negligent, or done with conscious indifference or reckless disregard. The facts decide which applies.
Yes. Section 261.101 of the Family Code requires every adult with reasonable cause to believe a child has been abused, by an adult or by another child, to report immediately, and professionals to report within 24 hours. Knowing failure to report is an offense under Section 261.109.
The organization's duty to supervise and protect is the same. The claim is for what the program knew about that child, what supervision its rules required, and what it did when it first heard. The abuser's age can affect the claim against that child's family. It does not change what the program owed yours.
Thirty years for the child sexual abuse conduct listed in Section 16.0045(a), and five years for the offenses listed in Section 16.0045(b), which include sexual assault of an adult, measured from accrual. Ask about your dates.
Section 16.0045(d) tolls the limitations period when a petition names the unknown defendant as John or Jane Doe, provided you proceed with diligence to identify the person. The claim against the organization does not wait on that.