Relating to actions brought by the attorney general on behalf of certain persons under the Texas Free Enterprise and Antitrust Act of 1983.
Summary
HB 4256 would expand the Texas Attorney General’s authority under the Texas Free Enterprise and Antitrust Act of 1983 to file civil actions on behalf of individuals and governmental entities that were injured by violations of the state antitrust law. The bill specifically authorizes the attorney general to sue for harm caused directly or indirectly by conduct prohibited under Section 15.05(a), (b), or (c) of the Business & Commerce Code, and it allows those cases to be filed in Travis County or in other counties tied to the defendant or the injured party.
If the attorney general prevails, the bill requires recovery of actual damages, prejudgment interest, court costs, attorney’s fees, and, when applicable, expert witness fees. It also provides for treble damages if the unlawful conduct is found to be willful or flagrant, while preventing double recovery in cases involving both direct and indirect purchasers. The bill defines “governmental entity” broadly to include the state, its agencies, political subdivisions, and various public or quasi-public bodies.
Impact
The bill would amend Chapter 15 of the Business & Commerce Code by adding new subsections to Section 15.21, creating a clearer statutory basis for the attorney general to pursue antitrust claims on behalf of public entities and private parties. It would affect businesses accused of antitrust violations, as well as state and local governments and other public entities that may seek recovery for business or property injuries. The new provisions would apply only to causes of action accruing on or after September 1, 2025.
Sentiment
The available record shows no committee testimony or recorded votes, and the bill was left pending in committee. Based on the bill’s structure, it appears to be a pro-enforcement antitrust measure intended to strengthen public recovery tools, but the absence of debate or votes means there is no documented public sentiment in the record provided. The committee status suggests the proposal had not advanced beyond initial consideration as of the last action date.
Contention
The main policy issue is the expansion of attorney general enforcement authority to sue on behalf of both individuals and governmental entities, which could be viewed as strengthening antitrust remedies but also broadening state litigation power. Potential points of contention include the scope of who may be represented, the ability to recover treble damages and fees, venue choices across the state, and the inclusion of indirect purchaser injuries while avoiding duplicative recovery. Businesses facing antitrust exposure would likely be the primary opponents, while public entities and consumer or competition advocates would likely support the measure.
Prohibiting persons who engaged in wrongful conduct from recovering damages in certain civil actions, prohibiting certain public nuisance claims, providing that only the attorney general may file claims regarding public nuisances that are not wholly contained in one political subdivision unless the attorney general delegates authorization to file such claims and requiring special injury for certain public nuisance actions.
Relating to certain actions for personal injury that arise out of a sexual offense against a child or disabled individual and are brought against a non-perpetrator of the offense.
Relating to certain actions for personal injury that arise out of a sexual offense against a child or disabled individual and are brought against a non-perpetrator of the offense.
Relating to the establishment of the Texas Committee on Foreign Investment to review certain transactions involving certain foreign entities in coordination with the attorney general; creating a civil penalty.