Judge Awards $44,316.53 in Motor Vehicle Negligence
One driver's vehicle collided with another driver's vehicle. The owner of the first vehicle sued the second driver, alleging the collision was caused by the second driver's failure to pay attention. The owner also sued the second driver's vehicle owner, claiming negligent entrustment. The second driver denied responsibility and raised several defenses. The case proceeded to a bench trial, and the court ruled in favor of the first vehicle's owner, awarding damages.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Plaintiff
- Amount
- $44,316
- County
- Harris County, TX
- Resolved
- 2019
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Other
- Accident Type
- Other
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence
Case Overview
On July 2, 2016, a vehicle owned by the plaintiff, Auto Club Enterprises, was damaged in a collision with a vehicle operated by the driver defendant. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit on June 27, 2018, alleging the driver defendant failed to maintain a proper lookout, which caused the collision. The plaintiff also initially named the vehicle owner defendant, claiming negligent entrustment, asserting she knew or should have known the driver defendant was incompetent or unlicensed.
The driver defendant filed an answer with a general denial and raised several affirmative defenses, including a denial of conditions precedent, laches, failure of consideration, lack of consideration, failure to mitigate, waiver, and estoppel. No counterclaims were filed. On September 9, 2018, the court granted the plaintiff's motion for partial nonsuit, dismissing the claims against the vehicle owner defendant without prejudice.
The case proceeded to a bench trial, and on October 28, 2019, the court rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The court awarded the plaintiff a total of $44,316.53, which included $41,409.14 in damages and $2,907.39 in prejudgment interest, along with court costs and post-judgment interest at 5.25% per year. The judgment was entered solely against the driver defendant.
VerdictlyTM Score
This outcome differs from typical 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 better results 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.
A case was filed in Texas by the plaintiffs against an individual defendant and defendant Rockwell Collins, Inc. Few details were available regarding the incident that led to the lawsuit or the specific legal claims asserted. The record indicated the case concluded on June 12, 2015. No further information was provided regarding the arguments of each side, the outcome, or the reasons for the verdict or judgment.
In October 2011, a plaintiff was driving a compact car eastbound on Interstate 10 in Harris County, Texas. While moving to the outside shoulder to yield to an approaching fire truck, the plaintiff's vehicle struck a rectangular hole in the pavement, causing a right front tire blowout. The hole, approximately two feet long and several inches deep, had resulted from the removal of a traffic-counting device and had not been refilled. The plaintiff alleged a shoulder injury. The plaintiff filed a premises liability lawsuit against the Texas Department of Transportation, alleging the hole constituted an unreasonably dangerous "special defect" that the agency knew or should have known about. The court ruled that the hole was a special defect as a matter of law. The defendant denied knowledge of the condition and contended that the plaintiff was negligent for failing to keep a proper lookout. The plaintiff claimed the incident aggravated a pre-existing partial rotator cuff tear, while the defense argued the injury was entirely pre-existing and noted a six-month gap in the plaintiff's treatment history. After a two-day trial, a jury found the Texas Department of Transportation negligent and awarded the plaintiff $9,973. The jury's finding of negligence was based on the determination that the defendant "knew or should have known" of the dangerous condition. The jury did not find the defendant negligent based on "actual knowledge," nor did it find the plaintiff comparatively negligent. The award included damages for past medical costs, past physical impairment, past lost earning capacity, and past physical pain.
A plaintiff filed a negligence lawsuit in Dallas County, Texas, alleging that on April 2, 2012, a defendant negligently operated a vehicle. The plaintiff claimed the defendant failed to yield while making a turn, causing a collision with the plaintiff's car. The plaintiff alleged injuries from the incident. The lawsuit was filed on April 1, 2014, in the District Court, 14th District Court, Dallas County, Texas. The parties later reached a settlement agreement on June 26, 2015. Under the terms, the plaintiff accepted $7,000 in full settlement of all claims. On July 9, 2015, the court entered an agreed order dismissing the case with prejudice based on the parties' joint motion.
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.
A negligence case was filed following a motor vehicle incident that involved a commercial vehicle. The plaintiff brought the action against the defendant. A defense expert specializing in areas such as forensic auditing and transportation safety was involved in the proceedings. The parties reached a settlement agreement, concluding the case on June 30, 2015.