Texas Jury Awards $16,500 in Motor Vehicle Negligence

An individual filed a negligence lawsuit following a rear-end collision that occurred on October 25, 2011, in Houston, Texas. The plaintiff, a 36-year-old mechanic, was stopped at the intersection of Wallisville Road and Main Street, waiting to make a left turn, when the defendant's vehicle struck the rear of the plaintiff's car. The plaintiff alleged the defendant was negligent by failing to control speed, maintain a proper lookout, and properly apply brakes. The plaintiff claimed the collision caused injuries to his cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine, including disc bulges and a disc protrusion. The defendant denied all allegations of negligence and injury, asserting that the plaintiff's own comparative or contributory negligence caused the accident. A jury found the defendant negligent and awarded the plaintiff $9,020 in compensatory damages.

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.

On March 13, 2012, a plaintiff was injured in a multi-vehicle collision while driving in slow traffic near Highway 59 in Houston, Texas. The defendant driver reportedly swerved into the plaintiff's lane, striking a vehicle behind the plaintiff, which then collided with the rear of the plaintiff's slowing car. The plaintiff subsequently filed a vehicular negligence action. The plaintiff alleged the defendant was negligent in failing to maintain a proper lookout, operating a vehicle unsafely, and failing to apply brakes in a timely manner, which led to injuries including to the chest, neck, back, and a partial to full thickness tear of the right rotator cuff. The defendant denied all allegations of negligence and injury. Following the proceedings, the court found the defendant negligent and that this negligence caused harm to the plaintiff. The plaintiff was awarded $10,000 for past pain and suffering, $10,000 for past disfigurement, and $10,003 for past medical expenses, totaling $30,003.

On January 4, 2013, a pick-up truck towing a trailer was involved in a rear-end collision with an armored vehicle on a highway. The plaintiff, driving the pick-up, sustained injuries to their back and knee. The armored vehicle was operated by a defendant driver and owned by a defendant employer. The plaintiff filed a petition against the defendants in the District Court for Harris County, Texas, on September 27, 2015. The lawsuit alleged that the defendant driver's negligence caused the accident and the plaintiff's injuries. The defendants countered, claiming the plaintiff was negligent by veering into the armored vehicle's lane of travel. Following a trial, a jury on December 9, 2015, found the defendant driver negligent and determined that the plaintiff was not negligent. A judgment was entered on December 30, 2015, awarding the plaintiff $92,000 for past medical expenses, $40,000 for past lost earnings, and $160,000 for past pain and suffering, totaling $292,000. An appellate court later affirmed the trial court's decision.

On November 14, 2011, a rear-end collision occurred on the Katy Freeway in Houston, Texas. The plaintiff had stopped her vehicle in the left lane due to traffic when the defendant's vehicle struck it from behind. The plaintiff alleged the collision caused sprains and strains to her cervical and thoracic spine and left shoulder. The lawsuit claimed the defendant was negligent by traveling at an excessive speed, failing to maintain an assured clear distance, and failing to brake in a timely manner. Initially, the defendant argued the plaintiff made a sudden stop, which prevented avoidance. However, prior to trial, the defendant stipulated liability for the collision. The dispute then focused on the extent of the plaintiff's injuries, with the defendant maintaining that the plaintiff was not seriously injured and any alleged injuries were pre-existing. A jury found that the plaintiff did not suffer any serious or permanent injury in the collision.