Georgia Court Rules for Defense in Car Crash, $1,133 in Fees
One driver filed a lawsuit against another driver and their employer after a car crash. The defendants argued the case was filed too late. The court agreed and dismissed the case. The court also ordered the driver who filed the lawsuit to pay the defendants' legal fees.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Defense
- Amount
- $1,133
- County
- Dallas County, GA
- Resolved
- 2024
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Other
- Accident Type
- Other
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence
Settlement Context
This verdict-defense of $1,133 is near the median of Undisclosed for other cases resolved by verdict-defense. The typical range is Undisclosed to $9,827, based on 107 cases in our database.
Case Overview
A plaintiff filed a civil action seeking damages following a motor vehicle collision that occurred on February 27, 2021. The complaint, filed on March 14, 2023, named the driver, their employer, and an insurer as defendants.
The defendants asserted that the plaintiff's claim was barred by a two-year statute of limitations, which had expired on February 27, 2023, before the defendants were served. The defendants filed a motion for summary judgment based on this defense. The plaintiff filed an opposition, which the court noted was untimely.
On June 6, 2024, the court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment. The court determined that the statute of limitations was not tolled under O.C.G.A. § 9-3-99, as there was no active criminal prosecution against the defendant driver. The case was terminated in favor of the defendant driver and their employer. The court later awarded attorneys' fees and costs totaling $1,133.30 to the defendant driver and employer, to be paid by the plaintiff.
Understanding This Case
- 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, Georgia. Local jury tendencies, judge assignments, and regional economic conditions all influence case outcomes in this jurisdiction.
- Resolved in 2024, 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 Dallas County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
The employer, Star*Tel Systems, appealed a decision by an administrative law judge in Kentucky. The judge had previously determined that an employee sustained a permanent and total disability following a work-related motor vehicle accident. The appeal challenged the judge's opinion, order, and award.
A plaintiff with a classic automobile insurance policy filed a claim after three vehicles went missing or were stolen from a storage location in Denver, Colorado. The policy required storage in a specific secure building, but the plaintiff had moved the vehicles during renovations. Two vehicles were later recovered severely damaged, while a third remained unlocated. The insurer made a partial payment for one vehicle but denied full coverage, attributing some damage to wear and tear and denying the unrecovered vehicle's claim. The plaintiff sued the insurer in federal court, alleging breach of contract, unreasonable delay and denial of payment under Colorado statutes, and common-law bad faith. The insurer counterclaimed, seeking a declaratory judgment, alleging breach of the policy's misrepresentation and concealment provisions, and requesting recoupment of payments. These counterclaims were permitted to proceed following a magistrate judge's recommendation, which a district judge adopted. The plaintiff later amended the complaint to add the insurance producer as a defendant, alleging negligence if insurer coverage was denied. In July 2023, the plaintiff and the insurer filed a stipulation of dismissal with prejudice for all claims between them, indicating a settlement had been reached. The specific terms of this settlement were not publicly disclosed. Each party agreed to bear its own costs and attorney fees.
A lawsuit stemmed from a motor vehicle and pedestrian collision. The plaintiff presented expert testimony related to life care planning and rehabilitation, indicating claims for long-term care and disability. The defendant countered with expert testimony from fields including psychology, neuropsychology, and orthopedic surgery. The parties reached a resolution, and the case was concluded with a stipulated dismissal in April 2019.
A personal injury case arose from an auto accident. The plaintiff retained an expert in economics to assess damages. The defendant presented experts in emergency medicine, biomechanics, and accident reconstruction, suggesting disputes over the nature or cause of injuries. An occupational therapy expert also participated in the case. The matter proceeded to a trial, which concluded on December 9, 2016. Details regarding the verdict or any award were not specified in the record.
A plaintiff alleged bilateral rotator cuff injuries resulted from paramedics' forceful removal of the plaintiff from a motor vehicle accident. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendants, presumably alleging negligence in the plaintiff's care. The court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment in September 2006, concluding the case in favor of the defense.
Explore More Cases Like This
Browse similar cases by injury type and location to get a better understanding of case values in your area.