Bexar County Jury Awards $124.5M in Defective Car Seat Case
A child sustained a severe brain injury when a driver crashed into the back of his father's car. The impact caused the driver's seat to collapse, leading to the child's head hitting his father's head. The child suffered a fractured skull, partial paralysis, and blindness, requiring lifelong assisted living and medical care.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Settlement
- Amount
- $124,000,000
- County
- Bexar County, TX
- Resolved
- 2016
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Catastrophic Injury
- Accident Type
- Rear-end
- Case Type
- Design defects, negligence, failure to warn, malice, gross neglect
Settlement Context
This settlement of $124,000,000 is above the median of $1,000,000 for catastrophic injury cases resolved by settlement. The typical range is $52,460 to $15,025,000, based on 8 cases in our database.
Case Overview
In December 2012, a vehicle driven by the child’s father was stopped in Bexar County, Texas, behind a school bus when another driver crashed into it from behind. The impact caused the driver's seat to collapse rearward, striking the head of the seven-year-old child seated in the back. The child suffered a traumatic brain injury, including a depressed skull fracture, partial paralysis, and blindness, requiring lifelong assisted living and extensive medical care.
The plaintiffs, the child and his family, filed a lawsuit in Bexar County District Court against the driver who caused the rear-end collision, and against the car manufacturers, Audi AG and Volkswagen Group of America Inc. The suit alleged design defects and negligence against the car manufacturers, claiming the driver’s seat was defective and they knew about the defect but failed to warn consumers. The plaintiffs also claimed malice and gross neglect against the car manufacturers and negligence against the defendant driver.
The car manufacturers denied responsibility, arguing the child’s father was contributorily negligent for not securing the child in a child safety seat and for failing to mitigate damages. They also contended the plaintiffs failed to identify an adequate alternative seat design. The defendant driver argued that the car manufacturers were primarily at fault due to the alleged design defect and sought to have any liability reduced by their percentage of responsibility.
A jury on March 2, 2016, awarded the family $124.5 million. The jury found that design defects in the vehicle's driver's seat caused it to collapse and that the car manufacturers were negligent in failing to warn about the defect, attributing 55 percent of the liability to them. The defendant driver was found 25 percent responsible, and the child's father was found 20 percent responsible for not securing the child in a car seat. Under Texas law, a party found more than 50 percent responsible is liable for the entire amount of damages. No punitive damages were awarded.
Understanding This Case
- This case was resolved through a settlement, avoiding the uncertainty and expense of a trial. Settlements typically resolve faster and provide guaranteed compensation.
- This case was resolved in Bexar County, Texas. Local jury tendencies, judge assignments, and regional economic conditions all influence case outcomes in this jurisdiction.
- Resolved in 2016, this case reflects the legal and economic conditions of that period, including medical costs, insurance practices, and jury award trends at the time.
VerdictlyTM Score
This outcome differs from typical similar cases
This score is calculated by analyzing injury type, accident details, geographic location, temporal trends, and comparing against 2,000+ similar cases in our database.
Want to check your case value?
Get a free case evaluation to understand what your motor vehicle accident case might be worth based on cases like this in Bexar County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
On May 26, 2004, a plaintiff was a passenger in an automobile that was rear-ended near the intersection of Bedford Avenue and De Kalb Avenue in Brooklyn. The plaintiff's vehicle was preparing to make a U-turn when the collision occurred. The plaintiff subsequently filed a lawsuit, alleging the driver of the striking vehicle was negligent and the vehicle owner was vicariously liable. The defendants conceded liability, and the case proceeded to trial solely on the issue of damages. The plaintiff claimed to have sustained a herniated disc at C5-6, seeking medical treatment 21 days after the incident. Treatment included chiropractic care, acupuncture, massage therapy, and hot and cold packs over several months. The plaintiff reported missing two days of work and alleged permanent neck pain, decreased range of motion, and episodes of immobility, asserting an inability to engage in activities such as dancing, playing basketball, or wearing high heels. A family medicine physician testified on the plaintiff's behalf. The defendants argued that any injuries sustained by the plaintiff resolved within 90 days of the accident, with the decreased range of motion improving within three months. A radiologist testified for the defense, stating that the plaintiff's MRIs were normal and indicated no injury. Prior to the verdict, the parties agreed to cap any damages award at $25,000, which represented the policy limits. The plaintiff had also settled a claim with the driver of the vehicle in which she was a passenger for $3,500. Following the trial, a jury awarded the plaintiff $30,000, including $10,000 for past pain and suffering and $20,000 for future pain and suffering. The final recovery was then reduced to the agreed-upon $25,000 cap.
A plaintiff filed a lawsuit following a motor vehicle accident, claiming severe and permanent injuries. The plaintiff sought damages for significant pain, suffering, discomfort, emotional distress, and a diminished ability to enjoy life. During the proceedings, both sides presented expert medical testimony. The plaintiff's experts included specialists in Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Sports Medicine, Osteopathic Medicine, and Physical Therapy. The defendant's expert was also a specialist in Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation. The case concluded with an award of $779,627 to the plaintiff.
A plaintiff alleged she was injured when her vehicle was rear-ended in traffic, subsequently pushing it into a third car. After settling with the at-fault driver for $25,000, which represented the policy limit, she sought underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage from her insurer, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, claiming her damages exceeded that amount. State Farm denied the UIM benefits. The plaintiff, joined by her husband for a loss of consortium claim, filed suit in the Colorado First Judicial District for the County of Jefferson. The complaint alleged breach of contract, bad faith breach of insurance contract, and violations of Colorado statutes. State Farm asserted affirmative defenses, including failure to mitigate damages. Following a jury trial, the jury rendered a verdict for State Farm. It found the plaintiff failed to cooperate with State Farm's investigation, that these actions were material, substantial, and disadvantaged the insurer, and that she intentionally misrepresented material facts. The court entered judgment for State Farm. The parties later stipulated to dismiss the case with prejudice, with State Farm waiving costs in exchange for the plaintiff's waiver of appellate rights. The court granted the dismissal.
A rear-end collision occurred on Highway 80 in Perry County on August 25, 2014. The defendant, who was reportedly checking to see if the road was clear to pass, struck the plaintiff's vehicle. The defendant stipulated fault for the moderate collision. The plaintiff, a 64-year-old retired coal miner, was treated and released from a local emergency room for apparent neck and back strain, then sought follow-up care with a family doctor before beginning chiropractic treatment. Evidence also indicated a disc protrusion in the plaintiff's neck. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit blaming the defendant for the injuries sustained. Medical proof at trial included testimony from a chiropractor and an orthopedic expert. The plaintiff sought damages for medical expenses totaling $18,156 and $500,000 for pain and suffering. The defense argued that the plaintiff exaggerated the injuries, presenting expert testimony suggesting only a temporary strain that should have resolved quickly and that the disc protrusion was pre-existing and unrelated to the crash. The defense also questioned the plaintiff's credibility regarding a prior accident from 25 years earlier, which the plaintiff had denied during a deposition but had previously pursued a lawsuit over. The plaintiff stated a lapse of memory for the prior incident. During deliberations, the jury requested to see the police report and the deposition from the plaintiff's prior accident case, but the judge informed them these items were not admitted into evidence. After 90 minutes of deliberation, the jury awarded the plaintiff $12,000 for medical bills and $110,000 for pain and suffering, totaling $122,000. Prior to the verdict, the parties had entered a Hi-Lo agreement with parameters of $100,000 to $25,000. Consequently, judgment was entered for the plaintiff in the sum of $100,000.
A rear-end collision occurred in Norwood, Ohio, on November 14, 2017, involving the plaintiff and an at-fault driver. The plaintiff sustained a C5-6 disc injury, requiring fusion surgery approximately ten months after the crash, and an L4-5 injury, which led to a microdiskectomy in December 2018. Medical bills for these treatments totaled $80,739. The at-fault driver's insurer settled for its $25,000 policy limits without a lawsuit. Following the initial settlement, the plaintiff filed an underinsured motorist (UIM) action against their own insurer, seeking compensation for medical expenses and pain and suffering. The plaintiff's insurer disputed the extent of damages, presenting testimony from a defense orthopedic expert who concluded the plaintiff's treatment course was unrelated to the crash, citing a thirteen-year history of similar symptoms. The defense also raised a $1,000 medical expense threshold defense. The case proceeded to a two-day jury trial in Florence, focusing on causation and damages. The jury first determined the plaintiff met the $1,000 medical threshold. They then awarded the plaintiff $80,939 for medical expenses and an additional $195,000 for pain and suffering, totaling $275,939. A judgment was entered for $240,739, accounting for the underlying policy limits and personal injury protection (PIP) coverage. The defense had made an $18,000 offer of judgment.
Explore More Cases Like This
Browse similar cases by injury type and location to get a better understanding of case values in your area.