Worked example · updated 2026-08-02
A shared-fault injury claim in Texas, method by method
A hypothetical Texas injury claim with documented bills and lost wages, valued by the multiplier method and then reduced by the claimant's share of fault under the state's proportionate-responsibility statute. The same claim is computed with no fault attributed, so the reduction is visible.
Illustrative worked example. The household is hypothetical; every figure is computed by the same verified engines and rule packs the calculators use.
The situation
This hypothetical claimant was injured in Texas. Their medical bills to date are $8,400, they lost $2,600 in wages, no further treatment is projected, and the injury falls in the moderate band — months of treatment with a full or near-full recovery expected. A share of the fault is attributed to them. The same claim is then computed with no fault attributed and nothing else changed, so the effect of the state's rule is separable from the method.
What goes in
- Medical bills to date
- $8,400
- Projected further treatment
- None
- Lost wages to date
- $2,600
- Severity band
- Moderate
- Share of fault attributed to the claimant
- 20%
What comes out
Published-method range, after the state’s fault rule
$22,240 – $28,960
A range because the method produces one — no source publishes a point value.
- Economic damages (bills plus lost wages)
- $11,000
- Multiplier band for a moderate injuryA widely repeated convention in consumer-legal writing, not a rule of law.
- 2× – 3×
- Same claim with no fault attributed to the claimant
- $27,800 – $36,200
- Reduction the fault share costs at the top of the range
- $7,240
- Deadline to file in this stateTex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §16.003
- 2 years
Verified 2026-08-02 against Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code, Chapters 16, 33, 41, 74 and 101 (effective 2003-09-01)
The method is a convention, and it is worth saying so
The multiplier method totals economic damages and multiplies them by a factor reflecting severity. It has no statutory basis in Texas or anywhere else in the United States. It is a convention repeated widely enough in published consumer-legal writing to function as a reference point in a negotiation, which is genuinely useful and is not the same thing as law. Naming the band in plain language rather than offering a bare numeric dropdown is the least a calculator can do, because the band choice is where the output is really decided.
Texas reduces, until it does not
Chapter 33 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code bars recovery when a claimant's responsibility is greater than half, and reduces it proportionally below that. The wording is what matters: greater than half, so a claimant found exactly half at fault still recovers half. Georgia's rule, phrased as fifty percent or more, produces nothing on the same facts. That is one word of statutory drafting deciding a real case, and it is the reason a fault rule has to be read rather than looked up in a summary table.
The caps that did not apply here, and why they are still shown
Texas caps non-economic damages in medical malpractice actions and limits claims against government defendants, and neither reaches an ordinary claim between private parties. The pack behind this page carries all of them anyway, with the statute cite for each, because a reader needs to know which limits exist and which are simply not in play for their facts. The same pack also records a cap held unenforceable in another state's statute — reported and never applied, because a legislature that keeps printing a struck-down figure will otherwise be read literally by anything that scrapes it.
The deadline outranks everything above it
The limitation period is shown with the result rather than in a footnote, because every valuation method produces a number that assumes a claim can still be brought. A missed deadline makes the number irrelevant. Whether a particular claim is inside the period depends on when it accrued, whether a discovery rule applies, and whether the defendant is a government body with its own shorter notice requirement — questions for a lawyer licensed in the state, and the first ones worth asking.
What an insurer is doing on the other side
Insurers value claims with internal software weighing factors no published formula can see, and the number that comes back is a different object from a published-method estimate. Treating one as a forecast of the other is the mistake these calculators usually invite. What the method genuinely provides is a defensible reference point and a record of how it was reached, which is why the documentation score and the worked math trail sit alongside the range rather than behind it.
What this example is good for
It shows what the published conventions produce from documented figures, and separates that from what state law then does to the result. Both halves are checkable; neither is a prediction, and the strength of the underlying evidence is doing more work than the multiplier is.
Run this with your own numbers — Car Accident
Estimate a car accident claim the way published consumer-legal literature describes it: economic damages, a severity multiplier or a per-diem figure, then your state’s fault rule and any statutory cap. Outputs a range with the arithmetic shown and the statute behind each adjustment cited.
Calculators behind this example
Car Accident
Estimate a car accident claim the way published consumer-legal literature describes it: economic damages, a severity multiplier or a per-diem figure, then your state’s fault rule and any statutory cap. Outputs a range with the arithmetic shown and the statute behind each adjustment cited.
Pain & Suffering
Work out what the published multiplier and per-diem methods produce from your medical bills, projected treatment and lost wages — then apply your state’s comparative-negligence rule, its damage caps, and its filing deadline. The result is a range, with every step shown and cited.
Case File
A ten-point check of how complete your documentation is — the records, bills, photographs, timeline and deadline that any conversation about a claim starts from. It scores the paperwork, never the claim, and prints as a cover sheet you can take to a consultation.
Estimate only — not legal advice. This is the published math for car accident settlement calculator, shown as a range. Your actual outcome depends on facts, evidence, and decisions this page cannot see.
Your data never leaves your device Learn more
Rule-change alerts — when a guideline, cap or statute we publish is re-verified
One email when the numbers change. Double opt-in, no spam, unsubscribe anytime.