Dallas Improper Vehicle Repair Settles for Undisclosed Amount

A plaintiff driver and passenger suffered severe injuries in a December 2013 motor vehicle accident in Dallas, Texas. Their 2010 Honda Fit was involved in a collision after another vehicle lost control and crossed into their lane. The plaintiffs alleged that a defendant collision center, which had previously repaired the vehicle's roof for a prior owner, was responsible for exacerbating their injuries. They claimed the collision center improperly used adhesive glue instead of 108 welds as specified by the manufacturer, leading to the roof separating and the vehicle's safety cage collapsing during the accident.

During the trial, the plaintiffs argued that the improper repair compromised the vehicle's structural integrity, causing significantly more severe crush injuries and trapping the driver, who sustained extensive burns. They presented crash test evidence and testimony indicating the collision center opted for glue due to insurance company requirements, despite manufacturer guidelines. The collision center countered that the accident's severity caused deceleration injuries, not those from structural failure. It maintained that the roof panel was not a structural part of the safety system and contended that adhesive glue was as strong or stronger than welds.

The jury found the collision center 75% liable for the plaintiffs' injuries and the driver of the other vehicle 25% liable. The jury awarded the plaintiff driver $25,888,153 for past and future pain, disfigurement, physical impairment, medical expenses, and lost wages, among other damages. The plaintiff passenger was awarded $16,047,471 for similar categories of damages, including medical expenses and loss of consortium.

Following the verdict, the parties reached a settlement for an undisclosed sum under a high/low agreement. As part of the resolution, the parties also agreed to conduct crash testing to further study the safety implications of glued versus welded vehicle repairs.