Dallas Jury Issues Defense Verdict in Rear-End Collision
One driver was involved in a four-vehicle collision on a highway. The first driver rear-ended the second, and the third driver stopped behind the second. The fourth driver then rear-ended the third driver. The injured person sued the first and third drivers, but one settled before trial. The injured person later dropped their own claims. The defense argued the injured person was at fault. The jury found that the defendants' actions did not cause the injury and that the injured person's actions did.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Defense
- Amount
- Undisclosed
- County
- Dallas County, TX
- Resolved
- 2020
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Cervical Disc Injury
- Accident Type
- Rear-end
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence
Case Overview
On November 27, 2020, a four-vehicle rear-end collision occurred on U.S. Highway 75 in Dallas. The incident involved one driver rear-ending a lead vehicle, a third driver stopping behind the second, and then a fourth driver, the plaintiff's co-driver, rear-ending the third vehicle. The plaintiff and her co-driver subsequently filed a negligence lawsuit against the other three drivers. One defendant settled before trial, and the plaintiff's co-driver later nonsuited his claims. The plaintiff proceeded pro se against the two remaining defendants.
At trial, the plaintiff alleged that one defendant was negligent for driving too fast, following too closely, or failing to keep a proper lookout. She also claimed the other defendant's brakes were malfunctioning, causing him to stop with a parking brake that did not illuminate his brake lights. Both defendants denied negligence, with the second defendant specifically denying the use of his parking brake. The first defendant argued that the plaintiff's co-driver was solely at fault for the collision. The plaintiff sought damages for alleged cervical disc disorder, a thoracic sprain, and radiculopathy, along with emotional suffering. However, her medical bills and records were not admitted into evidence, and only past physical pain was submitted to the jury.
The court granted a directed verdict for the defendant accused of brake malfunction. The case against the remaining defendant then proceeded to a jury, which rendered a defense verdict. The jury specifically found that the negligence of any of the original defendants, including the settling party, did not proximately cause the plaintiff's injury. Instead, the jury concluded that the negligence of the plaintiff's co-driver was the proximate cause of the incident.
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 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 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.