Dallas Jury Awards $4,895 in Texas Rear-End Collision
One driver was traveling westbound when another driver, who was unlicensed, struck their vehicle from behind. The collision caused injuries to the occupants of the first vehicle, including neck, back, head, and chest injuries. The defense argued that some treatments were not necessary and that existing conditions were aggravated. The jury awarded damages for past medical expenses.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Plaintiff
- Amount
- $4,895
- County
- Dallas County, TX
- Resolved
- 2019
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Neck Injury (Whiplash)
- Accident Type
- Rear-end
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence, Rear End Collision
Case Overview
On March 8, 2015, a motor vehicle collision occurred in Dallas, Texas, when a vehicle operated by an unlicensed defendant struck the rear of a car carrying a plaintiff driver and two plaintiff passengers. The plaintiffs filed suit, alleging the defendant's negligence for failing to control her speed and negligence per se due to her unlicensed status. They sought damages for various bodily injuries, property damage, and loss of earning capacity, claiming the driver sustained a mild traumatic brain injury and disc displacement, while passengers suffered conditions including herniated discs, shoulder tearing, and post-traumatic headaches.
The defendant disputed the extent and causation of the plaintiffs' alleged injuries, arguing that not all treatments were necessary or reasonable, and that some alleged injuries were pre-existing or merely soft tissue strains. For instance, the defense contended that one passenger's shoulder and back issues predated the accident.
A jury subsequently awarded the plaintiffs a total of $4,895. This amount covered past medical expenses: $800 for the plaintiff driver, $1,000 for the back-seat passenger, and $3,095 for the front-seat passenger. The verdict, which focused solely on a portion of past medical expenses, suggested the jury largely accepted the defense's arguments regarding the limited scope and causation of the plaintiffs' injuries.
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 alleged another driver was negligent in striking their vehicle. A second driver then struck the first driver's vehicle, causing it to hit the plaintiff's vehicle a second time. The plaintiff suffered injuries to their neck, back, and shoulder. The parties resolved the claim for $60,750.
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 was stopped to make a left turn when the other driver, who admitted to being distracted, rear-ended them at high speed. The injured driver was taken to the emergency room with neck pain and a head laceration. Later, they underwent a cervical fusion surgery and experienced symptoms of a mild traumatic brain injury and seizure-like symptoms. Medical bills exceeded $400,000.
One driver was traveling in Beaumont when their vehicle struck the rear end of a pickup truck. The occupants of the car claimed they suffered injuries. The driver of the pickup truck fled the scene and was never identified. The occupants sued their own insurer for underinsured-motorist benefits. The case proceeded to trial regarding one occupant's claim, with the defense arguing inconsistencies in her account of the accident.
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.