Dallas County Jury Awards $9,000 in Rear-End Collision
One driver was stopped at a red light when the other driver rear-ended them. The occupants of the first vehicle claimed neck and back injuries. The driver of the first vehicle underwent chiropractic care for soft-tissue injuries. The defense argued the injuries were pre-existing and the treatment was excessive. The jury found the second driver negligent and awarded damages.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Plaintiff
- Amount
- $9,000
- County
- Starr County, TX
- Resolved
- 2017
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Back Strain / Soft Tissue
- Accident Type
- Rear-end
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence
Case Overview
On January 16, 2014, a vehicle operated by the plaintiff, with a minor passenger, was rear-ended on Lake June Road by a vehicle driven by the defendant. Both occupants claimed neck and back injuries. The plaintiff, individually and on behalf of the minor, subsequently sued the defendant, alleging negligence in the operation of her vehicle. The defendant contended her foot had eased off the brake while stopped at a red light, arguing her conduct did not constitute negligence. Prior to trial, the minor's claims were settled for undisclosed terms, and the minor was dismissed from the case.
The trial proceeded with the adult plaintiff seeking damages for past medical expenses, pain, and impairment. The plaintiff reported soft-tissue injuries diagnosed after an emergency room visit and underwent extensive chiropractic care, claiming $18,918 in medical costs. A treating chiropractor opined that MRI imaging indicated the injuries resulted from the collision. The defense, however, argued that the plaintiff had a history of pre-existing neck and back injuries, that the treatment was excessive and unnecessary, and noted the treating chiropractor had provided contradictory opinions on the cause of the injuries.
Following a two-day trial in Dallas County, a jury deliberated for two hours. The jury found the defendant negligent and awarded the plaintiff $9,000 for past medical costs.
VerdictlyTM Score
This outcome aligns very well with similar cases
This score is calculated by analyzing injury type, accident details, geographic location, temporal trends, and comparing against 2,000+ similar cases in our database.
Need 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 Starr County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
One driver was stopped at a red light when their vehicle was struck from behind by another vehicle. The driver who was struck claimed injuries to their back, knee, and neck. The case alleged the trailing driver was negligent for failing to maintain a safe distance and control their speed. The jury found the trailing driver liable and awarded damages for past medical expenses.
One driver was stopped at a traffic signal when their car was struck from behind by another vehicle. The driver who was rear-ended claimed injuries to their back and neck. The driver who caused the collision admitted to being groggy and potentially falling asleep briefly before the impact. The injured driver sought damages for medical expenses and pain.
One driver was stopped in traffic when their vehicle was struck from behind by another vehicle. The driver who was rear-ended claimed injuries to their back and neck. The case proceeded to trial to determine damages, as liability was conceded.
One driver was stopped on a road when their car was struck from behind by another car. This initial impact propelled the stopped car into a third vehicle. The driver of the first car claimed injuries to their back and neck, seeking damages for medical expenses and pain.
One driver was traveling on a freeway when their car was struck from behind by a box truck. The driver who was hit claimed injuries to their back and neck. The responding officer believed the truck driver failed to control speed, but also faulted the other driver for an unsafe lane change. The truck driver claimed the other driver suddenly moved into their path. The jury found both drivers equally liable for the accident.