San Antonio Jury Awards $72,465.20 in Rear-End Collision

On March 3, 2016, a compact car driven by the plaintiff was rear-ended by a minivan driven by the defendant at a stoplight in Leon Valley. The plaintiff claimed to have sustained shoulder, neck, and back injuries as a result of the collision. The plaintiff subsequently filed a lawsuit alleging the defendant's negligent operation of her vehicle.

The plaintiff testified that she saw the defendant approaching and anticipated a potential collision. She was transported to a hospital and later diagnosed with a torn left supraspinatus tendon and cervical and lumbar sprains. Her treatment involved physical therapy, a steroid injection, and open shoulder surgery, followed by additional physical therapy. An orthopedic surgeon testified that the car accident caused the shoulder injury and that all treatment was reasonable and necessary. The plaintiff sought compensation for past medical expenses, past physical pain, past physical impairment, and past and future disfigurement related to her shoulder injury.

The defendant testified that she had stopped behind the plaintiff and, upon the light turning green, released her brake, expecting the plaintiff to proceed. When the plaintiff did not move, the defendant stated she was unable to stop in time. The defense argued the impact was minor, describing it as a "tap" that caused minimal vehicle damage, although the defendant had previously rated the impact's severity as 4 out of 10 in a recorded statement. The defense also contended that the plaintiff exaggerated her pain, citing a prior diagnosis of left shoulder impingement and previous neck and back complaints, as well as gaps in the plaintiff's treatment timeline.

After a three-day trial, a jury in San Antonio, Texas, deliberated for three hours before finding the defendant liable for the accident. The jury awarded the plaintiff $72,465.20 in damages, which included compensation for past medical costs, past physical impairment, and past physical pain. The verdict indicated the jury found the defendant's negligence caused the plaintiff's injuries, despite the defense's arguments regarding the impact's severity and pre-existing conditions.