Fort Bend County Jury Finds Negligence in Rear-End Collision, Awards $0

In June 2016, a cafeteria worker was driving a sedan on North Main Street in Paris, Texas, when a pickup truck operated by a city water-department employee rear-ended her vehicle. The plaintiff claimed she sustained neck and back injuries and headaches from the collision. She subsequently filed a lawsuit against the city, alleging negligence in the operation of the city vehicle. The city stipulated to liability for the accident itself.

The plaintiff claimed the accident resulted in a disc protrusion and multiple disc bulges in her spine, along with headaches from hitting her head on the headrest. She underwent various treatments, including physical therapy, chiropractic care, and a revision lumbar laminectomy and fusion, but reported continued symptoms. She argued the collision aggravated pre-existing spinal conditions and caused her to become unable to work, impacting her daily life, a claim supported by testimony from her family. Her attorney suggested that even a low-speed impact could cause severe injuries if an individual was susceptible.

The defense did not dispute the plaintiff's pain and limitations but argued the accident did not cause them. They presented evidence that the impact was minimal, with the city's driver and an eyewitness testifying that the vehicles barely touched and photos showing little damage to the plaintiff's vehicle. A biomechanical engineer, retained by the defense, opined that such an impact could not have caused the claimed injuries. The defense also highlighted the plaintiff's extensive pre-existing conditions, including a prior spinal surgery and multiple applications for Social Security disability before the accident, challenging her credibility and the link between the collision and her current medical state.

After a two-day trial and one hour of deliberation, the jury awarded the plaintiff $4,120. The verdict aligned closely with the defense's suggestion to award only amounts for past medical expenses through the initial days after the accident and a minimal sum for past physical pain, implying the jury largely agreed with the defense's argument that the severe injuries and long-term disability were not directly caused by the minor collision but were primarily attributable to pre-existing conditions.