Louisville Jury Awards $3,725 for Medical Care in Rear-End Crash
One driver was stopped in traffic when the other driver rear-ended their vehicle. The driver who was hit did not report injuries at the scene. Several days later, they began experiencing neck and back pain, and later reported knee pain. An MRI revealed a meniscal tear, and surgery was performed. The injured driver sought damages for medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering, arguing the knee injury was caused by the crash. The other driver argued the knee injury was unrelated to the collision.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Defense
- Amount
- $3,725
- County
- Jefferson County, KY
- Resolved
- 2022
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Knee Injury
- Accident Type
- Rear-end
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence
Case Overview
A motor vehicle accident occurred on February 25, 2017, on Interstate 264 near Shelbyville Road, when the plaintiff's vehicle was rear-ended by the defendant's vehicle in stop-and-go traffic. The defendant admitted fault for the moderate impact, which resulted in a dented bumper, but no injuries were reported at the scene. Six days later, the plaintiff began treatment for soft-tissue neck and back pain. Approximately one month after the collision, the plaintiff reported knee pain, which an MRI later revealed as a meniscal tear. An orthopedic specialist in Louisville performed surgery for the tear.
The plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking damages, alleging that both the soft-tissue symptoms and the meniscal tear were a direct result of the rear-end collision. The plaintiff sought medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering, supported by testimony from a biomechanical engineer expert who connected the crash to the injuries.
The defendant argued that the knee injury was unrelated to the accident, citing the absence of injury reports at the scene and the 30-day delay in reporting knee pain. The defense presented testimony from a physiatrist who concluded that the crash forces and the plaintiff's position were insufficient to cause the meniscal tear, also noting the plaintiff's history of mild knee arthritis.
A jury awarded the plaintiff $3,725 for medical expenses, specifically covering only the first two weeks of chiropractic care. The jury rejected the plaintiff's claims for lost wages and pain and suffering. A defense judgment was subsequently entered, reflecting a reduction for Personal Injury Protection (PIP). The outcome indicated the jury likely found only the initial soft-tissue claims credible, disassociating the later-reported knee injury from the accident based on the defense's arguments.
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 Jefferson County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
A plaintiff, then age 48, was involved in a rear-end collision on I-264 near Shelbyville Road in Louisville, Kentucky, on February 25, 2017. The defendant, operating a vehicle behind the plaintiff, rear-ended the plaintiff's car in stop-and-go traffic. The defendant admitted fault for the moderate impact, which dented the plaintiff's bumper. No injury was reported at the scene. Six days later, the plaintiff began seeking treatment for soft-tissue neck and back pain. Approximately one month after the incident, the plaintiff reported knee pain, which an MRI later revealed as a meniscal tear. Surgery was performed that July. The plaintiff subsequently filed a lawsuit seeking damages for medical expenses totaling $20,468, lost wages of $1,039, and $88,312 for pain and suffering. The plaintiff contended that both the soft-tissue injuries and the meniscal tear were a direct result of the collision. Treating physicians linked the knee injury to the crash, and a biomechanical engineering expert provided supporting testimony. The defendant conceded fault for the collision itself but disputed the causation of the knee injury. The defense highlighted the absence of immediate injury reports at the scene and the delay of about 30 days before the plaintiff mentioned knee pain. An expert physiatrist, evaluating the vehicle forces and the plaintiff's position, concluded that the crash had not caused the meniscal tear, suggesting the injury was instead related to the plaintiff's history of mild knee arthritis. A jury awarded the plaintiff $3,725 for medical expenses, specifically covering the first two weeks of chiropractic care. The jury rejected the plaintiff's claims for lost wages and pain and suffering. A defense judgment was subsequently entered, reflecting a reduction for personal injury protection (PIP).
The case concerned a secondary auto accident that occurred when traffic stopped due to an original collision. The plaintiff's experts included specialists in truck accident investigation and reconstruction, as well as vocational economic analysis related to lost wages and brain injuries. The defendant consulted an emergency medicine expert. An additional expert focused on human factors, ergonomics, and transportation. Few details were available regarding the incident's specifics, the legal claims made by the parties, or the case's final resolution.