Laura Leticia Zepeda Vasquez, Individually and on Behalf of the Estate of Jose Abraham Vasquez,Jr. v. Legend Natural Gas III, LP Legend Natural Gas, LLC Lewis Energy Group, LP And Lewis Petro Properties, Inc, 04-14-00899-CV

On August 4, 2012 Jose Abraham Vasquez, Jr. died after his vehicle left Krueger Road when he was allegedly blinded by a dust cloud; plaintiff is his widow, Leticia Vasquez.
Krueger Road once was a safe, paved public road; plaintiff alleges defendants’ oil-and-gas operations (heavy, frequent truck traffic, some overweight/reckless) substantially degraded the road (potholes, crevices, no lane markings) and created the dust hazard.
Plaintiff alleges defendants knew their operations were degrading the road faster than La Salle County could repair it, yet did nothing to repair or warn the public.
Plaintiff sued ten oil/gas-related defendants for negligence and gross negligence; defendants moved to dismiss under Tex. R. Civ. P. 91a as causes of action having “no basis in law.”
The trial court granted the Rule 91a motions and entered a final order dismissing plaintiff’s claims; plaintiff appeals, arguing the court erred as Texas law recognizes duties when a party creates a dangerous condition.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether defendants owed a legal duty after creating a dangerous condition on a public road	Vasquez: defendants who negligently created the dangerous condition on Krueger Road owed a duty to repair or, at minimum, to warn; pleading alleges foreseeability and knowledge	Defendants: dismissal ground — plaintiff’s claims have no basis in law (i.e., no duty exists)	Trial court granted Rule 91a dismissal as claims allegedly had “no basis in law”; appellant asks this court to reverse, arguing established Texas precedent imposes duties to repair or warn when a defendant creates a dangerous condition

Abalos v. Oil Development Co. of Texas, 544 S.W.2d 627 (Tex. 1976) (recognizes duty when actor creates dangerous condition that may foreseeably injure others)
SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Doe, 903 S.W.2d 347 (Tex. 1995) (discusses duty concepts when an actor’s conduct creates risk to third parties)
Buchanan v. Rose, 159 S.W.2d 109 (Tex. 1942) (duty to act/warn where one creates dangerous situation on a public way)
Cactus Drilling Co. v. Williams, 525 S.W.2d 902 (Tex. Civ. App.—Amarillo 1975) (application of duty when operations create hazardous conditions)
Dallas Ry. & Terminal Co. v. Archer, 167 S.W.2d 290 (Tex. Civ. App.—Dallas 1942) (similar principle that creating danger imposes responsibility to prevent harm)
Wooley v. Schaffer, 447 S.W.3d 71 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2014) (setting Rule 91a review standards and construing pleadings liberally in plaintiff’s favor)