Texas Jury Awards $1,600,000 in Truck Rear-End Collision

A semi-truck collision occurred on an interstate when one semi-truck driver struck another while reportedly traveling at excessive speeds. The case involved expert witnesses specializing in accident reconstruction, vocational rehabilitation, life care planning, and forensic economics. Further details regarding the specific legal claims, arguments presented by each side, and the final resolution of the case were not available in the record.

A policyholder purchased health insurance effective May 26, 2014. On September 30, 2014, the policyholder was involved in a motor vehicle crash, sustaining serious injuries and incurring over $123,200 in medical bills. In July 2015, the insurer denied coverage for the crash, stating the policyholder was ineligible at the time of the accident. The insurer later informed the policyholder that the policy was canceled due to "pre-existing conditions." The policyholder claimed this refusal forced him to pay $66,812.33 out-of-pocket for medical expenses. The policyholder filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, alleging breach of contract and bad faith dealing, and seeking damages. The defendant insurer asserted defenses including unclean hands, fraudulent inducement, deceit, and rescission of contract. The parties subsequently settled the case. A federal judge entered an order in August 2017, administratively closing the case without prejudice due to the compromise, and the parties later filed a joint stipulation of dismissal with prejudice.

A lawsuit was filed alleging a traumatic brain injury and claims of negligence, negligent hiring, and negligence per se. Few details were available regarding the specific incident or the parties involved in the complaint. Plaintiff's experts included specialists in economics, vocational rehabilitation, truck accident investigation and reconstruction, nursing, life care planning, neurology, neuropsychology, and accident reconstruction. Information about the case's resolution or outcome was not available.

A plaintiff alleged a commercial truck driver, operating a vehicle for a motor carrier and owned by another entity, caused a multi-vehicle collision in Oklahoma. The plaintiff claimed the truck driver was distracted by an electronic device while driving on a highway, leading the truck to strike the plaintiff's vehicle and push it into another. The plaintiff subsequently filed a vehicular liability complaint against the driver, the motor carrier, and the truck owner in the Oklahoma District Court of Oklahoma County. The motor carrier and the driver removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma. They filed an answer asserting affirmative defenses, including comparative negligence, lack of proximate causation, and failure to mitigate damages. The truck owner also filed an answer. The plaintiff later moved for either leave to amend the complaint or voluntary dismissal of the action without prejudice. The court denied the request to amend but granted the motion for voluntary dismissal without prejudice, and a judgment was entered accordingly.

The parents of a daughter killed in a car crash filed a product liability lawsuit against Toyota Motor Corporation and several related entities. Their daughter died while being driven home from driver's education in a 2020 Toyota Corolla. The plaintiffs alleged the vehicle was defective and that the Toyota defendants were negligent in its manufacturing and design, contributing to the fatal accident. The Toyota defendants contested the allegations, arguing there was no defect in the vehicle and no negligence in its manufacturing, design, or marketing. The court granted the Toyota defendants' partial motion for summary judgment regarding the strict liability claim in February 2025, finding the plaintiffs failed to provide sufficient evidence of a product defect making the vehicle unreasonably dangerous. In June 2025, the court granted summary judgment in favor of all Toyota defendants on the remaining negligence claims, determining there was no manufacturer negligence. These rulings concluded the case with a complete victory for the defendants. In August 2025, the court awarded the Toyota defendants $25,628.18 in attorneys' fees and costs, to be paid by the plaintiffs.