Texas Jury Awards $24,109 in Damages for Rear-End Collision

On July 9, 2013, a vehicle operated by the defendant allegedly rear-ended a car driven by the plaintiff. The plaintiff claimed the defendant negligently failed to yield and ran a red light, sustaining personal injuries in the incident. On April 8, 2014, the plaintiff filed a negligence petition for damages against the defendant in the District Court, 44th District Court, Dallas County, Texas. On February 10, 2015, the parties informed the court they had reached a settlement. The agreement provided that the plaintiff would accept $7,100 to resolve all claims. An agreed order of dismissal with prejudice was entered on February 20, 2015.

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 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.

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.

In Dallas County, a plaintiff filed a negligence lawsuit following a rear-end collision that resulted in a soft tissue neck injury. The plaintiff sought compensation for medical expenses totaling $9,901, along with damages for physical pain, mental anguish, and physical impairment. During the proceedings, both sides presented evidence regarding the plaintiff's injury and treatment, including testimony from chiropractic experts. The plaintiff argued for comprehensive damages related to the collision, while the defendant disputed the extent or causation of certain claimed injuries and their associated costs. A jury subsequently found the defendant negligent in causing the collision. However, the jury's award for damages was limited. It included $9,901 for past medical care, matching the plaintiff's claimed expenses, but awarded no damages for past or future physical pain and mental anguish, past or future physical impairment, or future medical care. The verdict, reached by an 11-1 vote, effectively recognized liability but restricted the scope of recoverable damages.