Harris County Jury Awards $8,200 in Car Repair Dispute
One driver's car was damaged in a rear-end collision. The car was taken for repairs, but the owner could not pay the bill. The repair shop kept the car and later obtained a judgment for the unpaid bill. The car owner then sued the repair shop. The court imposed sanctions against the repair shop for discovery abuse, leading to a default judgment. A jury then awarded the car owner damages for loss of use and loss in market value.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Plaintiff
- Amount
- $8,200
- County
- Harris County, TX
- Resolved
- 2015
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Other
- Accident Type
- Rear-end
- Case Type
- Economic Injury
Case Overview
A vehicle owner, identified as the plaintiff, took a car damaged in a rear-end collision to an automotive repair company, identified as the defendant, for repairs. As repair estimates increased to $4,172, the plaintiff requested the defendant stop work and return the vehicle. The plaintiff was unable to pay the accrued bill, and the defendant retained possession of the car. The defendant later obtained a judgment against the plaintiff for the unpaid repair costs.
On September 19, 2013, the plaintiff filed a petition against the defendant in District Court for Harris County, Texas, alleging claims including conversion and Deceptive Trade Practices Act violations. The trial court imposed death penalty sanctions against the defendant for discovery abuse, entering a default judgment. The case proceeded to a jury trial solely on damages, where the jury awarded the plaintiff $2,500 for loss of use and $5,200 for loss in market value. The jury also awarded an additional $500, finding the defendant knowingly engaged in the alleged conduct.
On August 8, 2015, the trial court signed a final judgment in favor of the plaintiff for $8,200 and ordered the defendant to return the vehicle within 30 days. An appellate court later affirmed this decision.
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 Harris County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
One driver rear-ended another vehicle stopped at a red light. The driver who was hit filed a lawsuit seeking damages for medical expenses and pain and suffering. The parties reached a settlement agreement.
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 traveling on a freeway when their car was struck from behind by a box truck. The driver who was hit claimed injuries to their back and neck. The responding officer believed the truck driver failed to control speed, but also faulted the other driver for an unsafe lane change. The truck driver claimed the other driver suddenly moved into their path. The jury found both drivers equally liable for 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 stopped in traffic on a highway when their vehicle was struck from behind by a bus. The driver claimed the collision caused permanent injuries, forcing them to change to a less physically demanding job. The bus company denied negligence. The jury found the bus company at fault.