Relating to liability of a cavern entity for injuries arising from certain activities.
Summary
HB 1130 creates a new Chapter 75C in the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code to provide limited liability protections for cavern operators. The bill applies to “cavern entities” that own or operate commercial properties with natural caverns used for recreational or educational cavern activities, and it generally bars liability for injuries, death, property damage, emotional distress, or other losses arising from a participant’s cavern activity if the required warning sign is properly posted at each cavern entrance.
The bill preserves liability in several important situations. A cavern entity can still be sued for injuries proximately caused by its own negligence regarding cavern safety, by a dangerous condition the entity knew or should have known about, by failure to train or improper training of involved employees, or by intentional conduct. The bill also requires a specific warning sign stating that Texas law limits the liability of a cavern entity for injuries or death resulting from cavern activities. The change applies only to causes of action accruing on or after the effective date, and the bill took effect immediately after enactment.
Impact
HB 1130 adds a new statutory liability framework specifically for commercial cavern attractions, giving operators a recreational-use-style protection from certain participant injury claims while preserving ordinary negligence and intentional tort liability. It affects the Civil Practice and Remedies Code by creating Chapter 75C and may reduce exposure to lawsuits for cave tour and cavern attraction businesses that comply with the posting requirement. Participants in cavern tours or educational cave activities remain able to pursue claims in the enumerated exceptions, especially where unsafe conditions, negligent operations, or inadequate employee training are alleged.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have broad bipartisan support and moved through both chambers with large margins. House and Senate votes were overwhelmingly favorable, and the House later concurred in Senate amendments, suggesting general agreement that the measure was a targeted liability clarification for a specific industry rather than a controversial policy shift. The bill also became effective immediately, indicating sufficient legislative support for expedited implementation.
Contention
The main policy tension is between protecting cavern businesses from broad exposure to participant-injury claims and preserving remedies for injured visitors. Supporters likely viewed the bill as a narrow liability shield tied to posted warnings and limited to commercial cavern activities, while any concerns would center on whether the immunity could reduce incentives for safety or make recovery harder for injured participants. The bill addresses those concerns by expressly preserving liability for negligence, known dangerous conditions, employee training failures, and intentional harm, which likely helped limit opposition.