A controversial bill aimed at reforming personal injury lawsuits in Texas failed to make it across the finish line in the most recent legislative session. Senate Bill 30 (SB 30) sought to dramatically change how damages are awarded in personal injury cases, specifically those involving large jury verdicts. While the bill passed both the Texas Senate and House, lawmakers couldn’t reconcile their differences before the deadline.
We’ve outlined what Texans need to know about the bill’s proposal, why it failed, and what it could have meant for personal injury victims and their attorneys.
What Was Senate Bill 30?
Senate Bill 30, authored by Senator Charles Schwertner, was introduced as a response to so-called “nuclear verdicts”, jury awards exceeding $10 million. Supporters of the bill argued that these large awards were often driven by inflated medical bills and legal tactics that they claimed distorted the true cost of care.
The original version of SB 30 included several significant reforms:
- Capping recoverable medical costs at actual amounts paid, or 150% of what private insurers typically pay for the same service.
- Restricting the evidence that juries could review about billed versus paid medical expenses.
- Altering definitions of damages under the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code.
- Requiring disclosure of any referral relationship between a lawyer and a healthcare provider.
Proponents, including Texans for Lawsuit Reform, the Texas Trucking Association, and other industry groups, claimed these reforms would reduce insurance premiums, discourage frivolous lawsuits, and protect businesses from runaway litigation costs.
Why Did Senate Bill 30 Fail To Pass?
Despite early momentum, SB 30 ran into trouble in the Texas House. While the Senate version passed in April 2025, the House made key amendments before approving it in May, most notably, restoring jury discretion in evaluating evidence. Supporters of the original bill argued that this change defeated its main purpose.
A conference committee attempted to reconcile the two versions just before the session ended. But lawmakers couldn’t reach an agreement in time, and the bill quietly died before the legislative deadline.
By the time it failed, the bill had been significantly weakened. The final draft would have only required disclosure of lawyer-provider relationships and expanded evidence rules, far from the sweeping reform originally proposed.
JOE STEPHENS | FOUNDER
The defeat of Senate Bill 30 is a huge win for everyday Texans. Juries—not insurance companies—still decide what’s fair. Justice remains in the hands of the people, and we’ll keep fighting to protect the rights of those injured through no fault of their own.
What This Could Have Meant for Injury Victims and Trial Lawyers
While not the centerpiece of the bill’s public debate, Senate Bill 30 would have had a major impact on how personal injury cases are prepared and presented in court.
For injury victims, the bill would have:
- Limited how much compensation they could receive for past medical expenses, even if those expenses were real and necessary.
- Made it more difficult to prove the full extent of their injuries and treatment needs.
- Undermined the role of the jury to weigh all the evidence and decide what’s fair.
For Joe Stephens and other Texas personal injury lawyers, SB 30 would have changed how cases are built and presented. Longstanding tools like deferred billing arrangements could have been questioned or restricted. Rules around what evidence is admissible would have shifted, making it harder to present a complete picture of a client’s damages.
The end result? Injured Texans might have faced more barriers to justice—and fewer resources to rebuild their lives after devastating accidents.
What Could SB 30 Have Changed?
While SB 30 never explicitly used the word “cap,” its reforms would have functioned like a damage cap in practice, limiting what juries could award for medical expenses and narrowing the evidence they could consider.
Had it passed, the bill could have:
- Reduced compensation for injury victims with real, documented healthcare needs.
- Shifted courtroom power away from juries and toward insurance carriers and defense teams.
- Changed the way lawyers prepare cases, including the use of deferred billing or expert medical testimony.
These changes would have affected how personal injury attorneys in Texas fight for fair compensation, especially in cases involving serious injuries and complex medical care.
What the Bill's Failure Means for Texans
For now, the legal landscape for personal injury victims in Texas remains unchanged. Injury victims can still present full evidence about their medical costs, and juries maintain the discretion to award fair compensation.
That means accident attorneys like Joe Stephens can continue to:
- Fight for every dollar injured Texans deserve
- Present strong, trial-ready cases with clear medical documentation
- Help clients access medical care, even if they can’t pay upfront
While supporters of SB 30 have vowed to revisit these reforms in 2027, the bill’s failure signals that lawmakers are not ready to rewrite the rules of personal injury law in Texas, at least not yet.
Need Help After an Accident? Joe Stephens Is Here for You.
If you’ve been injured in a car or truck accident in Texas, Joe Stephens, a double board-certified personal injury attorney, offers the personalized legal care you need. With offices in Houston, Katy, and Marshall, Joe fights aggressively, but fairly, to help injured Texans recover every dollar they deserve. Get a free consultation today.
