700 Florida car accident cases analyzed. Here's what they resolved for.

One driver's vehicle was hit from behind by another vehicle at an intersection. The injured person had insurance with the other party for uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage. The jury determined the injury was not permanent, and the recovery was reduced to zero after adjustments.

One driver was stopped at a traffic light when their vehicle was rear-ended by another vehicle. The impact caused the driver's head to strike the back window. The case involved uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage.

One driver alleged the other driver made an improper left turn, causing a collision. The jury found the first driver's negligence caused the injury and that the injury was permanent.

One driver was stopped at a red light when another driver struck them from behind. The injured driver had insurance policies that provided coverage. The driver who caused the accident admitted fault. The jury determined the injured driver did not have a permanent injury and awarded past medical expenses.

One driver rear-ended another at an intersection. The injured driver had uninsured motorist coverage with their insurance company. The jury awarded damages to the injured driver, but the net award was zero after post-trial motions.

One driver was stopped at a red light when the other driver rear-ended their vehicle. The injured person reported soft tissue injuries to their neck and back, and an aggravation of arthritis in their knee. The jury determined the injured person did not suffer a permanent injury from the accident.

One driver was a passenger in a vehicle that was rear-ended at an intersection. Liability was admitted. The jury found that the accident caused damage to the passenger, but the passenger did not sustain a permanent injury.

One driver alleged that their vehicle was struck from behind by another vehicle, which was then struck from behind by a third vehicle, forcing the second vehicle into the first vehicle again. The injured driver's doctor recommended treatment options that the driver did not pursue.

One driver was traveling when another driver rear-ended a vehicle in front of them. That vehicle was pushed into the first driver's car. The first driver claimed the impact caused permanent injuries, including disc issues in her back and neck. The other driver disputed the extent of the injuries, presenting an expert who believed the injuries were not traumatic. A jury found in favor of the first driver.

One driver struck another vehicle, which then rear-ended the plaintiff's vehicle. The collision was described as minimal impact. The jury determined that the plaintiff did not suffer a permanent injury from the accident.

One driver rear-ended another vehicle that was stopped in traffic. The impact caused the plaintiff's vehicle to hit a third vehicle. The defendant claimed the collision was a chain reaction caused by another vehicle hitting them.

One driver was stopped at a traffic light when the other driver rear-ended their vehicle. The defendant admitted fault for the collision. The jury found the defendant's actions caused injury, but that the injury was not permanent.