Lawsuit Against Valero Energy After Ardmore Refinery Explosion Injures Worker

Ardmore Blast Spurs Legal Action Against Valero

On Feb. 17, 2026, national trial firm Arnold & Itkin LLP files a lawsuit in Bexar County, Texas, against Valero Energy Corporation on behalf of Rolando Garza, a worker who last week suffers catastrophic injuries in a fire and explosion at Valero’s Ardmore, Oklahoma, refinery. The complaint details extensive trauma, including burns to the face and body, a fractured skull, multiple broken bones, internal injuries and ongoing post‑traumatic stress disorder, and seeks damages for what the firm calls life‑altering harm.

The suit alleges Valero fails to maintain a safe working environment and holds the company responsible for preventable safety failures that lead to industrial explosions. Founding partner Jason Itkin emphasizes that “industrial explosions are not merely accidents — they are often the result of dangerous working conditions and preventable safety failures,” and the filing presses Valero for accountability for Mr. Garza’s injuries and long‑term care needs. Arnold & Itkin files the case in Bexar County, where it is based, and offers media access to Mr. Garza’s attorney.

Valero does not immediately respond to the lawsuit in the filing and is expected to review the complaint through legal counsel. The litigation is likely to prompt scrutiny of safety practices at the Ardmore refinery and could lead to internal reviews and potential regulatory attention as the company addresses operational and workplace‑safety questions raised by the incident.

Plaintiff Counsel Notes National Reach

Arnold & Itkin, known for high‑stakes catastrophic injury and wrongful‑death litigation, highlights more than $20 billion recovered for clients in industrial disasters, maritime tragedies and workplace accidents. The firm provides a media contact, Aya Garfaoui, and an email in the press release as it pursues relief for Mr. Garza and other injured workers.

Industry and Regulatory Implications

The case adds to sector concerns over refinery safety and may accelerate inspections or enforcement activity by regulators monitoring the aftermath of explosions and fires. Beyond civil damages, the dispute could influence broader industry conversations about preventive maintenance, training and safety investment at U.S. refining facilities.