Dallas Jury Finds Negligence, Zero Recovery in Rear-End Collision
One driver stopped for traffic on a highway. The driver behind them rear-ended that vehicle, pushing it into the first driver. The first driver claimed injuries to their neck and back, including disc herniations. They sought damages for pain, impairment, and lost wages.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Settlement
- Amount
- $7,500
- County
- Dallas County, TX
- Resolved
- 2015
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Cervical Disc Injury
- Accident Type
- Rear-end
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence
Case Overview
A multi-vehicle collision occurred on November 9, 2012, on Interstate 35 in Dallas, Texas. The plaintiff, driving a pickup truck, stopped for traffic. A vehicle behind her also stopped, but a third vehicle, operated by the defendant, rear-ended the middle car, propelling it into the plaintiff's truck. The plaintiff sustained claimed cervical sprains and strains, and lumbar disc herniations, undergoing chiropractic care and physical therapy. She alleged the accident aggravated pre-existing conditions or caused new ones that prevented her return to work.
The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant, alleging negligent driving including failure to keep a proper lookout and control speed. She also initially sued the driver of the middle vehicle and the owner of the defendant's vehicle, but these parties were later dismissed from the case. The defendant largely acknowledged negligence, stating he was distracted by a vehicle on the shoulder. The plaintiff sought approximately $250,000 in damages, including medical bills, lost wages, and pain and suffering. Her chiropractor opined the injuries were acute and accident-related. However, a defense expert, an orthopedic surgeon, contended the plaintiff's conditions were due to pre-existing degenerative issues and that the impact was minor.
After a three-day trial, the jury found the defendant negligent and awarded the plaintiff $7,500. Despite the jury's verdict, the plaintiff ultimately received no financial recovery. This outcome occurred because, under a Texas rule concerning settlement offers and litigation costs, the defense was entitled to a setoff for its expenses, which exceeded the awarded damages.
VerdictlyTM Score
This outcome significantly deviates from 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.
Deserve a fair outcome 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 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.
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 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 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.