Texas Jury Reaches Verdict, Resolving Personal Injury Claims

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.

In Dallas County, a plaintiff filed a lawsuit after experiencing neck and back injuries in a rear-end collision. The plaintiff alleged the defendant's negligence caused the incident and sought damages for physical pain, impairment, and medical expenses. Prior to trial, the parties engaged in mediation, but the case proceeded to a jury. During the trial, the plaintiff presented testimony from an orthopedic medical expert regarding the injuries sustained. The defendant did not present any expert testimony. The jury ultimately returned a unanimous verdict in favor of the plaintiff. The jury awarded total damages of $7,131. This amount included $1,000 for past physical pain and suffering, $2,000 for past physical impairment, and $4,131 for past medical care. The jury awarded no damages for future pain and suffering, future physical impairment, or past and future mental anguish.

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.

A wrongful death lawsuit was filed in Texas following a motor vehicle accident on or about May 20, 2011. The incident resulted in the death of a passenger, who was traveling in a vehicle owned by a lumber company and operated by an individual associated with the company. The plaintiffs, representing the decedent's estate and his daughter, alleged the accident was a direct result of negligence by the lumber company, its owners and officers, and the vehicle operator. The lawsuit sought damages on behalf of the decedent's estate to cover funeral and burial expenses, as well as compensation for physical pain, disfigurement, impairment, and mental anguish the decedent allegedly experienced before his death. Separately, the decedent's daughter sought damages for past and future mental anguish, loss of society, love, companionship, and a decrease in her inheritance resulting from her father's untimely death. The plaintiffs also pursued exemplary and punitive damages, along with pre-judgment interest, under Texas law. The filing requested the court to compel the defendants to respond and aimed for a favorable judgment. Details on the case's resolution were not available.

A plaintiff filed a negligence lawsuit in Dallas County, Texas, alleging that on April 2, 2012, a defendant negligently operated a vehicle. The plaintiff claimed the defendant failed to yield while making a turn, causing a collision with the plaintiff's car. The plaintiff alleged injuries from the incident. The lawsuit was filed on April 1, 2014, in the District Court, 14th District Court, Dallas County, Texas. The parties later reached a settlement agreement on June 26, 2015. Under the terms, the plaintiff accepted $7,000 in full settlement of all claims. On July 9, 2015, the court entered an agreed order dismissing the case with prejudice based on the parties' joint motion.