§ 98.002.Liability
Title 4. Liability in Tort · Chapter 98. Liability for Trafficking of Persons · Last amended 2009 · Last verified August 29, 2026
Full Text of § 98.002
Plain-English Summary
The cause of action, and the second half of the first sentence is what gives it reach.
A defendant who engages in the trafficking of persons — or who intentionally or knowingly benefits from participating in a venture that traffics another person — is liable to the person trafficked for damages arising from the trafficking by the defendant or venture.
The beneficiary branch reaches beyond the trafficker. A person who did not traffic anyone but who intentionally or knowingly benefited from participating in a venture that did is liable for the same damages.
That is what makes the chapter useful against the businesses trafficking operates through — the hotel, the transport, the property, the platform — where the direct traffickers are unidentified, unreachable, or without assets.
Both elements are required for that branch: participation in the venture, and a knowing or intentional benefit from it. Providing services to a venture without knowledge is outside it.
Subsection (b) removes the criminal case as a defence entirely. It is not a defence that a defendant has been acquitted, has not been prosecuted or convicted, or has been convicted of a different offense or of a different type or class of offense for the same conduct.
The civil and criminal proceedings are independent, and the burdens differ. An acquittal establishes reasonable doubt, not the absence of the conduct.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who can be sued under the Texas trafficking statute?
A person who engages in trafficking, and a person who intentionally or knowingly benefits from participating in a venture that traffics another person.
Does that reach businesses?
Yes, where the business participated in the venture and knowingly or intentionally benefited from it — which is the route used against hotels, transport, and property owners.
Does an acquittal bar the civil claim?
No. Acquittal, non-prosecution, non-conviction, and conviction of a different offence are all expressly not defences.
Amendment History
- Added by Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 309 (H.B. 533), Sec. 1, eff. June 19, 2009.