Dallas Jury Finds No Negligence, No Damages in Rear-End Collision
One driver claimed the other driver rear-ended their van while they were stopped on a highway service road. The plaintiffs alleged neck and back injuries. The defendant denied any collision occurred. Evidence showed the plaintiffs' van had no damage and was never repaired. The defense argued the plaintiffs may have felt an impact when the driver's foot slipped off the brake.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Defense
- Amount
- Undisclosed
- County
- Tarrant County, TX
- Resolved
- 2016
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Back Strain / Soft Tissue
- Accident Type
- Rear-end
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence
Case Overview
On December 10, 2011, in Dallas, a husband and wife, traveling northbound on the service road of Central Expressway, alleged they were rear-ended by another driver. The plaintiffs, who claimed neck and back injuries from the incident, subsequently sued the defendant for negligence, citing failures to maintain a proper lookout, control speed, and avoid the collision.
The defendant denied any contact between the vehicles. The defense presented evidence that the plaintiffs' van was never repaired, introducing photos from a toll road authority and a repossession company that showed no damage. The defense argued that what felt like an impact to the plaintiffs was actually the plaintiff driver's foot slipping off and immediately reapplying the brake, an account reportedly consistent with the plaintiff husband's deposition testimony.
The plaintiffs sought damages for cervical and lumbar disc injuries, sprains, strains, and radiculopathy, supported by chiropractic visits, steroid injections, and MRI findings, requesting compensation for past and future medical bills, and pain and suffering. The defense challenged the plaintiffs' credibility, presenting evidence of the plaintiff husband's prior spinal complaints despite his denials, and noting the plaintiff wife's past conviction for theft.
After a three-day trial, a Dallas jury found no negligence on the part of the defendant. The jury awarded no damages to the plaintiffs.
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 Tarrant County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
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 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 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.
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.