Hurst, Texas Jury Awards $52,582 in Rear-End Collision

In September 2009, a plaintiff, then 68, was involved in two separate rear-end collisions in Houston. The first incident occurred on September 13 when a vehicle driven by a first defendant rear-ended the plaintiff's stopped car after a light changed. On September 21, a second defendant, operating a vehicle for an employer, rear-ended the plaintiff's car during rush hour traffic. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against both drivers, alleging negligence for failing to maintain a proper lookout or control speed. The suit also included claims of respondeat superior, negligent entrustment, and gross negligence against the employer, though the latter two claims were later nonsuited by the plaintiff during trial. The plaintiff claimed a lumbar injury or exacerbation of a pre-existing condition, which necessitated the implantation of a spinal cord stimulator and led to early retirement. Damages sought included physical pain, mental anguish, physical impairment, and lost earning capacity. The first defendant argued a low impact speed, while the second defendant claimed a sudden emergency and noted that neither police nor ambulances were called after their collision. Defendants presented expert testimony asserting the plaintiff's symptoms were pre-existing and unrelated to the collisions, highlighting prior medical conditions, a 2008 accident, and a pain management regimen predating the 2009 incidents. The defense also noted the plaintiff did not present medical testimony. At the close of all evidence, the court granted a directed verdict against the first defendant on negligence. However, the jury found no negligence on the part of the second defendant and ultimately awarded zero damages to the plaintiff. The outcome reflected the jury's acceptance of the defense's arguments regarding the lack of causation between the collisions and the plaintiff's claimed injuries.

A plaintiff driver filed a negligence lawsuit against a defendant driver following a rear-end collision. The incident occurred when the defendant, operating a sedan, struck the rear of the plaintiff's minivan. The plaintiff alleged the collision resulted in neck and back injuries, specifically cervical and lumbar sprain/strain, and headaches. The plaintiff underwent conservative medical care and claimed medical expenses totaling $11,711, seeking damages. The defendant denied liability, also disputing the causation and extent of the plaintiff's alleged injuries and damages. The matter proceeded to trial. After deliberating, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff. The jury awarded the plaintiff $6,412 in damages.

In Tarrant County, a plaintiff filed a lawsuit alleging negligence following a motor vehicle accident. The plaintiff claimed to have sustained bodily injuries, specifically soft tissue damage to the neck and back, as a result of the incident. A jury heard the case and delivered an 11-1 verdict in favor of the plaintiff. The jury found the defendant negligent and awarded damages totaling $2,226. This amount included $500 for past physical pain and mental anguish, and $1,726 for past medical care.

On September 19, 2013, a front-seat passenger in a sedan was injured when the vehicle was rear-ended by a 15-passenger van on Interstate 37 Frontage Road in Corpus Christi, Texas. The plaintiff, a carpenter, subsequently filed a lawsuit against the van driver and the driver's employer, alleging vehicular negligence and claiming the collision aggravated a pre-existing back injury. The plaintiff reported immediate back pain that worsened the following day, leading to an emergency room visit. An orthopedic surgeon later confirmed the collision aggravated a pre-existing degenerative disc disease. The plaintiff, who had a non-debilitating history of back pain, underwent physical therapy, steroid injections, and ultimately a two-level lumbar fusion. Treating physicians testified the collision necessitated surgery and affected his ability to perform manual labor. The plaintiff sought damages for past and future medical costs, lost wages, and pain and mental anguish. While the defendants did not dispute negligence for the collision, they contested causation and the extent of injury. The defense argued the impact was minor, noting the police report indicated no immediate injuries and the van was traveling at low speed. Defense experts opined the plaintiff's back problems were attributable to his pre-existing degenerative condition, not the accident, and that he would sustain no wage loss. Following a five-day trial, the jury found the defendant driver negligent and determined his negligence was a factual cause of the plaintiff's injuries. The jury awarded the plaintiff $563,003 in damages. The court subsequently added $32,257.69 for pre-judgment interest and court costs, resulting in a total judgment of $595,360.46 for the plaintiff.

On October 10, 2012, a vehicular collision occurred on West 34th Street in Houston, Texas. The plaintiff was driving eastbound when she slowed for traffic, and her vehicle was struck from the rear by a defendant's vehicle. The force of the impact pushed the plaintiff's car into the automobile in front of hers. The plaintiff filed a negligence lawsuit, asserting the defendant failed to maintain a proper lookout, apply brakes in a timely manner, and manage an assured clear distance. As a result of the accident, the plaintiff claimed to have suffered a blow to the head, lost consciousness, and was diagnosed with a concussion, a hematoma of the head, broken ribs, a collarbone, and a pelvis. She further alleged permanent brain injury affecting memory, balance, and causing tremors, in addition to depression. The defendant denied all allegations of negligence, contending the plaintiff caused the accident by making a right turn from a driveway into traffic and then suddenly braking. The defendant also disputed the extent of the plaintiff's injuries, maintaining that some were unrelated to the collision and resulted from pre-existing illness, disease, or another accident. After hearing the arguments, a jury found the defendant 100% liable for the accident. The plaintiff was awarded $70,000 in past damages.