Highland Park, Texas Court Awards $17,852 in Vehicle Collision
One driver was traveling on Mockingbird Lane and collided with another driver on Auberdale Avenue in Highland Park. The collision occurred in the intersection. There were no bodily injuries claimed, but there was damage to one of the vehicles. The court determined one driver was liable for the collision and awarded damages for the vehicle's repair.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Plaintiff
- Amount
- $17,852
- County
- Dallas County, TX
- Resolved
- 2017
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Other
- Accident Type
- Other
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence
Settlement Context
This verdict-plaintiff of $17,852 is near the median of $22,000 for other cases resolved by verdict-plaintiff. The typical range is $8,200 to $102,285, based on 304 cases in our database.
Case Overview
A vehicle collision occurred on June 3, 2016, at the intersection of Mockingbird Lane and Auberdale Avenue in Highland Park, Texas. A 2016 Porsche Macan, insured by the plaintiff, Government Employees Insurance Co., collided with a vehicle operated by the defendant. The defendant was determined to be liable for the incident, which resulted in property damage but no bodily injuries.
The plaintiff paid its policyholder $17,852 for the damages sustained to the insured vehicle, which covered property damage, rental car expenses, and a deductible. The plaintiff subsequently filed a subrogation lawsuit against the defendant to recover these payments. The defendant did not respond to the complaint, leading the court to issue a default judgment. The court then awarded the plaintiff $17,852.
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, Texas. Local jury tendencies, judge assignments, and regional economic conditions all influence case outcomes in this jurisdiction.
- Resolved in 2017, 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 aligns very well with 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 know what your case might be worth?
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.
On August 1, 2013, a pedestrian was injured in a hit-and-run accident at the intersection of Eighth Avenue and 40th Street in New York City. The pedestrian was in a crosswalk when an unknown vehicle struck her, causing severe personal injuries. The driver fled the scene without identifying themselves. On July 15, 2016, the injured party filed a claim against the Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation (MUAIC), asserting compliance with applicable state insurance law and claiming to be a covered person who had sustained a serious injury. The plaintiff sought damages for personal injuries, alleging the accident was caused solely by the negligence of the unknown driver and that all other available remedies had been exhausted. MUAIC responded with several defenses, arguing that the plaintiff's injuries were caused, in whole or in part, by her own conduct, or that she had not sustained a "serious injury" as defined under the state's insurance law. MUAIC also contended that the plaintiff might receive reimbursement from collateral sources, which would entitle the corporation to offset costs. The case proceeded to trial, and on November 18, 2019, a jury returned a verdict in favor of MUAIC, awarding no damages to the plaintiff.
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 rear-ended another vehicle stopped at a red light. The driver who was hit filed a lawsuit seeking damages for medical expenses and pain and suffering. The parties reached a settlement agreement.
One driver's pickup truck was struck from behind by another pickup truck. This happened shortly after the first pickup truck was struck by a third vehicle. The driver of the first pickup truck claimed an injury. The second pickup truck sustained significant damage.
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.