In this post we provide a comprehensive overview of the concept of gross negligence as it relates to personal injury claims and it’s comparison to ordinary negligence.
Let’s begin.
What is Gross Negligence?
While ordinary negligence focuses on carelessness, gross negligence takes it a step further.
Under Texas law, gross negligence involves not only a failure to exercise reasonable care but also “a reckless disregard for the safety and well-being of others.”
According to the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Section 41.001, gross negligence has two components:
- Objective risk: The defendant’s conduct must involve extreme risk, “considering the probability and magnitude of potential harm to others.”
- Subjective awareness: The defendant must have actual, subjective knowledge “of the risk involved but, nevertheless, proceed with conscious indifference to the rights, safety, or welfare of others.”
Gross negligence occurs when the defendant’s actions go beyond mere carelessness. The defendant must have known their actions posed a significant risk but chose to ignore it.
For example, if a construction company fails to provide safety harnesses to workers on high scaffolding despite knowing the danger, that could be considered gross negligence.
Key Differences Between Negligence and Gross Negligence
Understanding the difference between gross negligence and ordinary negligence is critical in Texas personal injury cases. While both hinge on a failure to exercise proper care, gross negligence requires a higher level of recklessness and disregard for safety. This distinction not only affects the legal process but also the types of damages the plaintiff may recover.
There are several critical differences between negligence and gross negligence, including:
Level of Risk and Awareness
The key difference between ordinary negligence and gross negligence lies in the level of risk involved and the defendant’s awareness of that risk. Ordinary negligence consists of a failure to act with reasonable care, but the defendant may not have been aware of the danger their actions posed. Gross negligence, on the other hand, requires the defendant to know about the extreme risk but choose to ignore it.
Legal Standards and Proof
To prove gross negligence in Texas, the plaintiff must meet a higher legal standard than for ordinary negligence. Specifically, plaintiff must show that the defendant acted with reckless disregard, not just carelessness. Gross negligence cases typically require more substantial evidence to demonstrate that the defendant acted with conscious indifference to the safety of others.
Impact on Damages

In negligence cases, the plaintiff may be entitled to compensatory damages, which are intended to cover the costs of medical bills, lost wages, physical pain, emotional suffering, and other injury-related losses.
In cases involving gross negligence, however, the plaintiff may also be entitled to exemplary damages, sometimes called punitive damages. As explained in Chapter 15 of Texas’ pattern jury instructions, punitive damages are not intended to compensate the injured victim, like compensatory damages, but rather to punish the defendant’s egregious conduct and deter similar behavior in the future.
Proving Gross Negligence in a Texas PI Case
I
In addition to showing that the defendant’s conduct posed an extreme degree of risk, the plaintiff must also prove their subjective awareness of the risk.
Proving gross negligence in a Texas personal injury case requires strong evidence, as the standard is higher than for ordinary negligence. Clear and convincing evidence is a higher threshold than the preponderance of the evidence standard used in typical civil cases.
This means the evidence must be highly and substantially more likely to be true than not. Here are some key types of evidence that can help establish gross negligence:
- Witness testimony: It can be crucial to have witnesses who can attest to the defendant’s reckless behavior or knowledge of the risks.
- Documentation: Emails, internal reports, or safety inspection records can show that the defendant was made aware of the risk but failed to act.
- Expert testimony: In some cases, expert testimony may be necessary to establish the degree of risk or the defendant’s knowledge.
- Prior incidents or violations: Evidence of past similar incidents or regulatory violations can show a pattern of reckless disregard.