Dallas Jury Finds No Negligence in Collision, Awards $0
One driver was traveling east on Lemmon Avenue in Dallas and was involved in a collision with another eastbound driver. The first driver claimed back and neck injuries. The case involved a dispute over who was negligent in changing lanes and causing the collision. The jury found no negligence by either party.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Defense
- Amount
- Undisclosed
- County
- Dallas County, TX
- Resolved
- 2015
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Back Strain / Soft Tissue
- Accident Type
- Sideswipe
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence
Case Overview
A collision occurred on April 3, 2013, on Lemmon Avenue in Dallas, Texas, involving two eastbound vehicles. The plaintiff, a 39-year-old registered nurse, alleged the defendant, driving another eastbound vehicle, negligently entered the center lane without proper lookout, colliding with the plaintiff's rear left panel. The plaintiff claimed cervical and lumbar strains and sought $8,751.12 for past medical expenses.
The defendant countered, arguing the plaintiff's negligence caused the incident by attempting to enter the center lane without proper lookout when the defendant had already occupied it. The case initially resulted in a default judgment for the plaintiff in October 2014 after the defendant's counsel did not appear. However, a new trial was granted following a defense motion.
The case proceeded to a second trial in April 2015. After 17 minutes of deliberation, the jury found no negligence by either party, resulting in a $0 award for the plaintiff.
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 Dallas County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
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 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 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 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 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.