College Station Jury Awards $17 Million in Motorcycle Negligence
A motorcyclist was traveling on a highway when a U-Haul truck allegedly entered his lane, forcing him off the road. The motorcyclist was thrown from his bike and sustained a head injury. The driver of the U-Haul truck stated he did not see the motorcycle and had panicked after losing sight of other U-Haul trucks. The defense argued that the motorcyclist drifted off the road and that the U-Haul was not involved. The jury found the U-Haul company and its driver negligent.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Plaintiff
- Amount
- $17,000,000
- County
- Brazos County, TX
- Resolved
- 2018
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Head/Brain Injury
- Accident Type
- Motorcycle
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence
Case Overview
On August 3, 2015, a motorcyclist was riding south on State Highway 6 in College Station when a U-Haul box truck, towing a trailer, allegedly forced the motorcycle off the road. The motorcyclist, who was not wearing a helmet, was thrown from the vehicle and sustained a severe head injury. The injured motorcyclist sued the U-Haul employee for negligence and U-Haul Co. of Texas for negligence, alleging inadequate training. The employee was later nonsuited.
The plaintiff argued U-Haul was negligent in training its 20-year-old employee, who was on his first day and inexperienced with large truck-and-trailer combinations. An eyewitness reportedly saw the U-Haul truck force the motorcycle off the road, and the employee admitted changing lanes to find his supervisor. The plaintiff sought damages for permanent cognitive deficits resulting from a diffuse axonal brain injury that required hospitalization and rehabilitation.
U-Haul denied its employee caused the accident or that its training was inadequate. The defense argued the plaintiff's eyewitness account was unreliable and presented testimony from three other motorists who saw the motorcycle drift off the road without a U-Haul vehicle. The defense also noted four 911 calls that did not mention a U-Haul truck. U-Haul contended its employee was qualified and adequately instructed. The defense also argued the plaintiff was contributorily negligent for not wearing a helmet, though a plaintiff's expert testified a helmet would not have prevented the rotational injuries.
After an eight-day trial, a College Station jury found U-Haul Co. of Texas and its employee negligent, but not grossly negligent. The jury determined the plaintiff was not negligent and awarded $17 million in damages.
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 Brazos County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
One driver stopped their vehicle on a highway when the other driver struck them from behind at a high speed. The impact caused the driver to hit their head and briefly lose consciousness. The injured driver claimed the accident caused a brain injury, preventing them from completing college studies, and also affected their ability to care for their young son. The other driver admitted to the collision but disputed the extent and cause of the injuries.
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.