Madison County Jury Awards $925,000 in Insurance Bad Faith Claim
One driver was involved in a chain-reaction rear-end crash. The at-fault driver had a limited insurance policy. The injured driver treated for soft-tissue injuries and aggravation of existing conditions, incurring medical bills and lost wages. The insurance company initially offered a low settlement amount. After the injured driver hired legal representation, the insurance company eventually paid the policy limits. The injured driver then filed a separate lawsuit against the insurance company for bad faith, alleging delays and low settlement offers. The jury found for the plaintiff on counts of failure to adopt reasonable standards, failure to settle, and compelling litigation. The plaintiff was awarded damages for emotional distress and punitive damages.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
About Back Strain / Soft Tissue Injuries
Back strain and soft tissue injuries are among the most common injuries sustained in car accidents. These injuries affect muscles, tendons, and ligaments in the back, often resulting from the sudden impact forces experienced during a collision.
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Plaintiff
- Amount
- $925,000
- County
- Jackson County, KY
- Resolved
- 2018
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Back Strain / Soft Tissue
- Accident Type
- Rear-end
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Accident
Settlement Context
This verdict-plaintiff of $925,000 is above the median of $15,000 for back strain / soft tissue cases resolved by verdict-plaintiff. The typical range is $5,873 to $40,000, based on 890 cases in our database.
Case Overview
A Madison County resident was involved in a chain-reaction rear-end crash on September 10, 2010. The plaintiff sustained soft-tissue injuries and an aggravation of pre-existing degenerative conditions, incurring approximately $23,000 in medical bills and $5,000 in lost wages. The at-fault driver was insured by GEICO with a $25,000 policy. GEICO determined the tortfeasor was at fault within weeks of the incident. By April 2011, GEICO offered the unrepresented plaintiff $5,000 to settle the claim, which the plaintiff rejected before retaining legal counsel.
After the plaintiff retained counsel in 2012, a demand letter was submitted to GEICO. Despite setting a reserve equal to the $25,000 policy limits, GEICO continued to offer only $5,000. The plaintiff filed a personal injury lawsuit, and GEICO subsequently paid the full $25,000 policy limits in February 2013, approximately 334 days after reserving the full amount. With the underlying claim resolved, the plaintiff then filed a separate third-party bad faith lawsuit against GEICO, alleging the insurer delayed settlement and made low settlement offers despite knowing the policy limits were owed.
The plaintiff advanced three bad faith claims at trial: GEICO failed to adopt reasonable standards for claims investigation, failed to act in good faith to effectuate a fair settlement, and compelled the plaintiff to institute litigation. The plaintiff focused on the insurer's internal documentation, which allegedly showed the $25,000 limits were owed a year before payment. GEICO denied bad faith, arguing its handling was fair and reasonable, citing the minor impact of the crash and perceived delays in the plaintiff's medical treatment. The jury found for the plaintiff on all three bad faith counts, awarding $175,000 for emotional distress and $750,000 in punitive damages, totaling a $925,000 verdict.
Understanding This Case
- The majority of soft tissue injuries resolve within 6-12 weeks with proper treatment. However, approximately 10-20% of cases may develop into chronic conditions requiring ongoing care.
- 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 Jackson 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 Jackson County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
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 was stopped on a road when their car was struck from behind by another car. This initial impact propelled the stopped car into a third vehicle. The driver of the first car claimed injuries to their back and neck, seeking damages for medical expenses and pain.
One driver was traveling south when their vehicle was struck from behind by another vehicle. The occupants of the first vehicle claimed injuries to their back and neck. The driver of the first vehicle alleged the other driver was speeding and inattentive, while the second driver claimed the first vehicle stopped suddenly. The first driver sought damages for medical costs, pain, and suffering.
One driver was stopped in traffic on a highway when their vehicle was struck from behind by a bus. The driver claimed the collision caused permanent injuries, forcing them to change to a less physically demanding job. The bus company denied negligence. The jury found the bus company at fault.
One driver was stopped at a red light when their vehicle was struck from behind by another vehicle. The driver who was struck claimed injuries to their back, knee, and neck. The case alleged the trailing driver was negligent for failing to maintain a safe distance and control their speed. The jury found the trailing driver liable and awarded damages for past medical expenses.
Explore More Cases Like This
Browse similar cases by injury type and location to get a better understanding of case values in your area.