Dallas County Jury Awards $387.6M for Defective Car Seats
A family was rear-ended by another vehicle. The impact caused the front seats of their car to collapse into the back seat, injuring their two young children. The parents sued the car manufacturer, alleging the front seats were defectively designed and failed to protect the children in a rear-end collision.
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
- Settlement
- Amount
- $243,236,248
- County
- Dallas County, TX
- Resolved
- 2018
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Head/Brain Injury
- Accident Type
- Rear-end
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence
Settlement Context
This settlement of $243,236,248 is above the median of $4,800,000 for head/brain injury cases resolved by settlement. The typical range is $50,000 to $13,478,106, based on 17 cases in our database.
Case Overview
On September 25, 2016, a family was involved in a rear-end collision on State Highway 85 in Dallas County, Texas. The driver was operating a 2002 Lexus ES 300, with a spouse in the front passenger seat and two minor children restrained in the back seat. While the plaintiff driver and spouse reportedly did not sustain major injuries from the impact, the vehicle's two front seats allegedly failed and collapsed into the back, striking the minor plaintiffs. Both children sustained skull fractures and traumatic brain injuries.
The parents, individually and as next friends of the minor children, subsequently filed a complaint in the Texas 134th Judicial District Court for Dallas County. They alleged strict products liability against Toyota Motor North America, Inc., Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc., and Toyota Motor Corporation, asserting the front seats were defectively designed and failed in a rear-impact collision. Negligence claims were also filed against the driver and owner of the striking vehicle, along with negligence and gross negligence claims against all defendants. Toyota Motor North America was later dismissed from the case.
A jury trial ensued. The parties had stipulated to the past reasonable and necessary medical expenses for the minor plaintiffs. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs, finding a design defect that caused the injuries. The jury also determined that a safer alternative design could have reduced the risk of injuries and was both economically and technologically feasible. They assigned 90% fault to Toyota Motor Corporation, 5% to Toyota Motor Sales as the non-manufacturing vehicle seller, and 5% to the driver of the striking vehicle.
The jury awarded the family a total of approximately $243.2 million. This included substantial damages for past and future physical pain, mental anguish, loss of earning capacity, disfigurement, physical impairment, and medical expenses for the minor plaintiffs, as well as mental anguish for the parents. Additionally, the jury awarded $144.4 million in exemplary damages against Toyota Motor Corporation and Toyota Motor Sales.
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 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 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 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 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 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.
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 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.
Explore More Cases Like This
Browse similar cases by injury type and location to get a better understanding of case values in your area.