Dallas Jury Awards $21,936 in Rear-End Collision
One driver rear-ended another vehicle that was stopped at a red light. The occupants of the stopped vehicle claimed injuries to their necks, backs, and shoulders. The defense argued the impact was minor and the injuries were exaggerated. The jury found the driver who caused the collision negligent and awarded damages to the plaintiffs.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Plaintiff
- Amount
- $21,936
- County
- Dallas 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 October 27, 2014, a rear-end collision occurred in Dallas on the feeder road of U.S. 75. The plaintiffs were stopped, waiting to make a right turn, when their vehicle was struck from behind by the defendant's vehicle. The defendant admitted being in a rush and mistakenly believed the plaintiffs' vehicle had proceeded while he was looking for an opening in traffic. The impact was minor, and no police report was filed.
The plaintiffs subsequently filed a lawsuit, alleging the defendant was negligent for failing to maintain a proper lookout, control speed, follow at a safe distance, and avoid the collision. Both plaintiffs claimed to have sustained multiple injuries, including cervical, lumbar, and thoracic ligamentous and disc injuries, nerve root irritation, and reduced range of motion. One plaintiff reported hitting her head on the steering wheel. Both plaintiffs sought chiropractic treatment and underwent MRIs, with one MRI showing disc protrusions.
The plaintiffs' counsel argued that the minor nature of the impact did not negate the severity of their injuries, attributing any delay in treatment to their busy schedules. They sought specific amounts for past medical bills and additional damages for pain, suffering, and physical impairment. The defense, while not strongly disputing liability for the collision, emphasized the minor impact and contended that the delay in treatment indicated a lack of significant injury. Through "dueling affidavits" from chiropractors, the defense expert argued that much of the plaintiffs' treatment, including MRIs and certain therapies, was not medically necessary, suggesting only a limited number of chiropractic visits were indicated. The defense also noted one plaintiff's prior back injury from a 2010 motor vehicle accident.
A jury found the defendant negligent and awarded the plaintiffs a total of $21,936. The award included $11,831 for past medical costs and $1,000 for past physical pain and suffering to one plaintiff, and $8,605 for past medical costs and $500 for past physical pain and suffering to the other. The jury's verdict was 10-2.
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 Dallas County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
One driver was traveling on a tollway when their vehicle ran out of gas and became disabled. The other driver, who was following behind, struck the disabled vehicle. The first driver claimed injuries to their neck and back. The jury found the second driver 80% liable and the first driver 20% liable.
One driver stopped in traffic due to construction. The other driver rear-ended the stopped vehicle. The injured driver claimed ankle and back injuries. The defense argued the accident was unavoidable or that the driver acted as an ordinary and prudent driver. The jury found the second driver liable but awarded no damages.
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.