Austin Jury Awards $2.43M in Fatal Truck Rear-End Collision
A passenger died in a multi-vehicle collision on Highway 183 in Austin. The collision involved two vehicles that were pushed into northbound lanes and struck by another car. The family of the deceased sued the drivers and their employers, alleging negligence in operation, distraction, and failure to train and monitor drivers. The defense admitted to following too closely but argued that cell phone use and training did not contribute to the crash. The jury found one driver and his employer mostly at fault.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Plaintiff
- Amount
- $2,150,000
- County
- Cameron County, TX
- Resolved
- 2016
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Wrongful Death
- Accident Type
- Multi-vehicle
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence
Case Overview
On October 6, 2014, a multi-vehicle collision on Highway 183 in Austin, Texas, resulted in the death of a 30-year-old passenger. The passenger's vehicle was rear-ended by a truck towing a boom lift, driven by an employee of Dynamic Industries Inc. The impact pushed the vehicle into oncoming traffic, where it was struck again, causing fatal injuries.
The deceased's family, joined by the driver of the deceased's vehicle (as a cross-plaintiff), sued the truck driver and Dynamic Industries Inc., alleging negligence and gross negligence. Plaintiffs contended the truck driver failed to maintain a proper lookout, control speed, and avoid the collision, also alleging cell phone distraction. They claimed Dynamic Industries Inc. was vicariously liable and directly negligent for insufficient training and policies, with their experts supporting these claims. Dynamic Industries Inc. conceded its employee was following too closely and accepted vicarious liability. However, the defendants argued the employee's hands-free cell phone use and alleged training deficiencies did not cause the crash, with defense experts acknowledging the employee's negligence in following too closely but asserting other factors were not causal.
After a seven-day trial, the jury found the truck driver 80 percent negligent and Dynamic Industries Inc. 20 percent negligent. The driver of the deceased's vehicle was found not negligent. Dynamic Industries Inc. was held 100 percent liable for the total award because its employee was acting within the scope of employment. The jury awarded the deceased's family $2.15 million and the cross-plaintiff $282,000.
VerdictlyTM Score
This outcome is within expected ranges
This score is calculated by analyzing injury type, accident details, geographic location, temporal trends, and comparing against 2,000+ similar cases in our database.
Want results like this for your case?
Share your situation and we'll connect you with experienced motor vehicle accident attorneys who have handled cases like this in Cameron County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
One driver was traveling on Interstate 10 when his pickup truck was struck from behind by another pickup truck. That second pickup truck had been propelled forward after being struck by a tractor-trailer. The driver of the first pickup truck claimed injuries to his back and neck. The case involved multiple defendants and allegations of negligence in vehicle operation and employer liability.
One driver was stopped at an intersection preparing to turn left when their vehicle was struck from behind by another vehicle. The driver claimed neck injuries. The other driver's insurer offered its policy limit. The injured driver sued their own insurer for underinsured motorist benefits, alleging the other driver was negligent. The defense questioned the extent of injuries and suggested they were pre-existing.
One driver was traveling in Montgomery County when her pickup truck was rear-ended by another vehicle in a four-vehicle chain collision. The plaintiffs' vehicle was pushed into the vehicle in front of it. The plaintiffs claimed injuries to their backs and necks. The driver of the rear vehicle contended that the accident started with the plaintiffs hitting the vehicle ahead of them. It was raining at the time of the accident.
One driver was traveling south when their vehicle was struck from behind by another vehicle. The occupants of the first vehicle claimed injuries to their back and neck. The driver of the first vehicle alleged the other driver was speeding and inattentive, while the second driver claimed the first vehicle stopped suddenly. The first driver sought damages for medical costs, pain, and suffering.
One driver was stopped behind another vehicle when her car was hit from behind by a trailing car. The injured driver claimed injuries to her back, head, and neck, including herniated discs and nerve impingement. The defense conceded liability, and the trial focused on damages. The injured driver testified that she still experiences back pain and has difficulty lifting children, impacting her ability to work as a nanny.