Texas Jury Reaches Verdict in Wrongful Death Negligence

A deli clerk filed a lawsuit after she slipped and fell at her workplace, a Kroger Signature Supermarket in Fort Worth, Texas, on August 23, 2011. The incident occurred behind the deli counter, an area that had been cleaned and mopped prior to her arrival. The plaintiff claimed she suffered a traumatic brain injury, anxiety, and depression after striking her head on the floor. She alleged that the supermarket's parent company, Kroger Texas LP, failed to provide a safe workplace by not properly training employees or having a policy to warn of wet floor conditions. The plaintiff's husband also sued for loss of services. The case was filed in United States District Court as Kroger Texas LP did not carry Texas workers' compensation. The plaintiff presented medical evidence of a concussion, scalp hematoma, and cervical neck sprain immediately following the fall, with subsequent diagnoses of a traumatic brain injury, impaired memory and attention, and chronic pain. Her expert neurologist testified that the injuries were causally related to the accident and would prevent her from working again. The plaintiff sought $2.6 million in damages for past and future pain and suffering, mental anguish, and economic losses, including over $300,000 for future medical care and over $500,000 for lost earnings and household services. The defense contended that routine cleaning procedures were followed, and the plaintiff, being aware of such maintenance, did not require additional warnings. The defendant argued that placing caution cones in the active deli area, which was considered a kitchen, would have created a greater tripping hazard for employees. The defense also asserted that all employees, including the plaintiff, were trained to be aware of their surroundings, and that the plaintiff was wearing required non-slip shoes and her workstation had a non-slip floor cover. Additionally, the defense claimed the plaintiff had pre-existing cervical and lumbar spine injuries from a 1998 motor vehicle accident, suggesting her medical experts had not fully reviewed her prior medical history. After an eight-day trial and one hour of deliberation, a jury returned an 8-0 verdict in favor of the defense. The jury found that Kroger Texas LP was not negligent in the plaintiff's injury, resulting in no award of damages.

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.

One driver stopped their vehicle on the highway due to a prior collision. The other driver then struck the stopped vehicle from behind at high speed, causing it to hit another vehicle in front. The collision resulted in the death of one passenger and injuries to another passenger and the driver.

In September 2009, a plaintiff, then 68, was involved in two separate rear-end collisions in Houston. The first incident occurred on September 13 when a vehicle driven by a first defendant rear-ended the plaintiff's stopped car after a light changed. On September 21, a second defendant, operating a vehicle for an employer, rear-ended the plaintiff's car during rush hour traffic. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against both drivers, alleging negligence for failing to maintain a proper lookout or control speed. The suit also included claims of respondeat superior, negligent entrustment, and gross negligence against the employer, though the latter two claims were later nonsuited by the plaintiff during trial. The plaintiff claimed a lumbar injury or exacerbation of a pre-existing condition, which necessitated the implantation of a spinal cord stimulator and led to early retirement. Damages sought included physical pain, mental anguish, physical impairment, and lost earning capacity. The first defendant argued a low impact speed, while the second defendant claimed a sudden emergency and noted that neither police nor ambulances were called after their collision. Defendants presented expert testimony asserting the plaintiff's symptoms were pre-existing and unrelated to the collisions, highlighting prior medical conditions, a 2008 accident, and a pain management regimen predating the 2009 incidents. The defense also noted the plaintiff did not present medical testimony. At the close of all evidence, the court granted a directed verdict against the first defendant on negligence. However, the jury found no negligence on the part of the second defendant and ultimately awarded zero damages to the plaintiff. The outcome reflected the jury's acceptance of the defense's arguments regarding the lack of causation between the collisions and the plaintiff's claimed injuries.

A civil case involving a plaintiff, who also acted as next friend for a second individual, and a defendant concluded in Texas on April 30, 2015. Few details were available regarding the specific incident that led to the lawsuit, the legal claims presented by either side, or the ultimate resolution of the dispute.