Tort reform bill fails to pass in Texas legislature

Senate Bill 30 (“SB 30”) died over the weekend after legislators failed to agree on a final version before the deadline, providing a set back to Texas legislators most recent efforts to institute tort reform legislation. In the early 2000’s Texas benefitted from large scale tort reform with the introduction of the Medical Malpractice and Tort Reform Act of 2003. The result was a $250,000 non-economic damages cap on medical malpractice lawsuits and a punitive damages cap. With some exclusions, punitive damages are also now capped at $200,000 or an amount equal to two times economic damages (up to $750,000). While those efforts helped curb some litigation, tort reform in other areas of Texas law has remained stagnant due to strong disagreements within the Texas legislature.  As a result, Texas remains a hotbed of ‘nuclear verdicts’ that critics say is disincentivizing businesses.

SB 30 was introduced on March 13, 2025 by Rep. Senators Charles Shwertner and Brent Hagenbuch. SB 30 sought to curb ever increasing ‘nuclear verdicts’ by amending definitions set forth in the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code as they relate to damages available in civil actions. For example, SB 30 removed arguably vague language in reference to “noneconomic damages” and added in specific definitions for “physical pain and suffering”, “future loss of earnings”, and “mental or emotional pain or anguish,” among others.  SB 30 sought to limit recovery of past health care expenses as economic damages to the amounts actually paid by third-party payors or the injured individual, or, in absence of payments, 150% of amounts paid by nongovernmental payors for similar services within the same month based on a geozip database. Proponents argued that this would address enormous and unfair verdicts caused by manipulation of medical damages to present vastly inflated medical bills to juries and disproportionately large awards of noneconomic damages. In a lawsuit seeking noneconomic damages, the bill required the court to provide the jury instructions with the revised definitions of particular damage types available and that such damages awarded must be for fair and reasonable compensation rather than to penalize or punish a defendant. SB 30 also provided revised rules for remittitur actions when awards for particular damage types exceeded certain amounts.

The Texas legislature failed to agree on a final version of SB 30 before the end of the legislative session on June 2, 2025. Though initially introduced as a significant tort reform bill, the Texas Senate and House culled all tort reform provisions by the time of SB 30’s demise. In its final form, SB 30 simply covered health care disclosures in civil actions and was devoid of any limiting language regarding damages as originally drafted. SB 30’s fate points to a robust disagreement between Texas legislators and Texas attorneys alike as it relates to damages in civil actions. While SB 30 could have provided significant changes to personal injury lawsuits, Texas remains a difficult litigation climate for defendants and their insurers.