Dallas County Jury Awards $243,236,248 in Product Liability Case
A family was stopped in traffic when their vehicle was rear-ended. They sued the manufacturer of their car, alleging it was defectively designed and marketed. The plaintiffs claimed the car's front seats were designed to yield rearward in collisions, causing front-seat occupants to move into the rear, injuring the children in the back. The manufacturer argued the other driver was solely responsible and that the injuries resulted from the severity of the impact.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
About Head/Brain Injury Injuries
Traumatic brain injuries (TBI) range from mild concussions to severe brain damage. Car accidents are a leading cause of TBI, with effects ranging from temporary symptoms to permanent cognitive impairment.
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Plaintiff
- Amount
- $242,100,000
- County
- Dallas County, TX
- Resolved
- 2018
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Head/Brain Injury
- Accident Type
- Rear-end
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence, Traumatic Brain Injury, Head, Traumatic Brain Injury
Settlement Context
This verdict-plaintiff of $242,100,000 is above the median of $1,893,000 for head/brain injury cases resolved by verdict-plaintiff. The typical range is $93,169 to $9,140,000, based on 45 cases in our database.
Case Overview
On September 25, 2016, a vehicle carrying a driver, a front-seat passenger, and two child rear-seat passengers was stopped in traffic on State Highway 75 in Dallas County when it was rear-ended. The two child passengers sustained severe traumatic brain injuries. The family sued the striking vehicle's driver for negligence and the manufacturer of their vehicle, Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. Inc. and Toyota Motor Corp., alleging the 2002 Lexus ES 300 was defectively designed and marketed, and claiming gross negligence. Certain initial defendants were nonsuited.
Plaintiffs contended the Lexus's front seats were defectively designed to yield rearward in collisions, causing front occupants to "ramp" into the rear passenger compartment and collide with the children. Expert testimony supported this theory, asserting the children's injuries stemmed from impact with their parents, not direct intrusion. Plaintiffs also argued the striking driver failed to maintain a proper lookout and control speed.
The manufacturer denied the defect claims, asserting its restraint system was safe and injuries resulted from the collision's severity and intrusion, not seat design. They also argued child restraints were improperly installed. The striking driver claimed defective seats exacerbated injuries, making his comparative responsibility minimal, and that the collision was unavoidable due to a sudden emergency.
After a three-week trial, a jury found the striking driver negligent and the manufacturer liable for design defect, marketing defect, producing cause, and gross negligence. The jury apportioned 90 percent liability to Toyota Motor Corp., 5 percent to Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A. Inc., and 5 percent to the striking driver. The plaintiffs were awarded $242,100,000, totaling $243,236,248.71 with stipulated past medical expenses, for the children's permanent injuries and long-term care needs.
Understanding This Case
- Most mild TBIs resolve within weeks to months. Moderate to severe TBI often results in permanent impairment affecting cognition, behavior, and physical function.
- This case went to trial and resulted in a jury verdict. Verdicts can yield higher awards but carry the risk of receiving nothing if the jury rules against the plaintiff.
- This case was resolved in Dallas County, Texas. Local jury tendencies, judge assignments, and regional economic conditions all influence case outcomes in this jurisdiction.
- Resolved in 2018, 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 significantly deviates from 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 understand 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 Dallas County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
One driver was slowing down in traffic when their vehicle was hit from behind by another car. The driver who was hit claimed injuries to their back, head, and neck. The other driver's insurance paid some of its policy limit. The injured driver then sued their own insurance company for underinsured motorist benefits, claiming their damages exceeded the amount recovered. The defense conceded fault for the accident, and the trial focused on the extent of the injuries.
One driver was traveling on a tollway when their vehicle ran out of gas and became disabled. The other driver, who was following behind, struck the disabled vehicle. The first driver claimed injuries to their neck and back. The jury found the second driver 80% liable and the first driver 20% liable.
One driver stopped their vehicle on a highway when the other driver struck them from behind at a high speed. The impact caused the driver to hit their head and briefly lose consciousness. The injured driver claimed the accident caused a brain injury, preventing them from completing college studies, and also affected their ability to care for their young son. The other driver admitted to the collision but disputed the extent and cause of the injuries.
One driver stopped in traffic due to construction. The other driver rear-ended the stopped vehicle. The injured driver claimed ankle and back injuries. The defense argued the accident was unavoidable or that the driver acted as an ordinary and prudent driver. The jury found the second driver liable but awarded no damages.
One driver sued another for failing to maintain a safe distance and avoid a collision. The defendant claimed the plaintiff was also at fault. The incident occurred when the defendant's vehicle struck the plaintiffs' vehicle from behind. The minor passenger complained of neck, mid-back, and rib pain, diagnosed as muscle sprain and cervicalgia. Further treatment included visits for headaches and pain in the neck and upper back.
Explore More Cases Like This
Browse similar cases by injury type and location to get a better understanding of case values in your area.