Dallas Jury Finds No Gross Negligence, Awards $1,500 in Rear-End Crash
One driver was traveling north in heavy traffic when another driver rear-ended them. The injured driver claimed neck, arm, and shoulder injuries. The case involved allegations of distracted driving. After an initial verdict, the case was remanded for a retrial. The injured driver was diagnosed with a spinal cord contusion and nerve damage, experiencing chronic neck pain and seeking damages for pain, suffering, and future medical expenses.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Plaintiff
- Amount
- $1,500
- County
- Dallas County, TX
- Resolved
- 2016
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Cervical Disc Injury
- Accident Type
- Rear-end
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence
Case Overview
In May 2008, a plaintiff was driving on the Stemmons Freeway in Dallas when their vehicle was rear-ended by a vehicle operated by the defendant. The plaintiff sustained neck, arm, and shoulder injuries and subsequently filed a lawsuit alleging the defendant was grossly negligent, having been distracted by a cell phone at the time of the collision. The plaintiff sought damages for future medical expenses, past and future pain and suffering, mental anguish, physical impairment, and past medical expenses.
The defendant stipulated to liability but denied gross negligence, disputing the extent of the plaintiff's claimed damages. The defense argued that while the plaintiff's initial 60 days of medical care were reasonable, subsequent treatment was unnecessary. The defense presented evidence that the plaintiff had successfully applied for a physically demanding job, contradicting claims of severe, long-term physical impairment. A treating chiropractor testified for the plaintiff about a contused spinal cord and ongoing treatment needs, but acknowledged signing return-to-work letters at the plaintiff's request.
The case first went to trial in 2012, resulting in a verdict for the plaintiff. However, the defendant successfully appealed the verdict to the 5th Court of Appeals of Dallas, arguing the jury instructions on medical bills were unjust. The matter was remanded for a retrial in Dallas County Court. The plaintiff did not appear at the retrial, and testimony from the initial trial was read via transcript. After a four-day trial and two hours of deliberation, the jury found no gross negligence on the part of the defendant and awarded the plaintiff $1,500 for past pain and suffering only.
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 Dallas County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
On December 11, 2017, a vehicle carrying two plaintiffs, a driver and a front-seat passenger, was struck from behind on Interstate 380 in Collin County, Texas. The plaintiffs subsequently sued the driver of the trailing vehicle, alleging negligence in the operation of her vehicle. The defendant driver conceded liability for the collision, and the trial proceeded solely on the issues of the plaintiffs' injuries and damages. Both plaintiffs claimed neck and back disc herniations, sought emergency room treatment, underwent chiropractic care, and reported residual pain and limitations in daily activities. They sought to recover damages for past and future medical costs, past and future pain and suffering, and past and future physical impairment. Following a three-day trial, a jury deliberated for two hours before awarding the driver plaintiff $25,016 in damages and the passenger plaintiff $25,273 in damages. The total award was $50,289.
On January 3, 2017, a collision occurred on U.S. Highway 75 in Allen, Texas. The plaintiff was driving north when the defendant, in an adjacent lane, entered the plaintiff's lane. The defendant's pickup truck and the plaintiff's sedan collided. The plaintiff claimed injuries to her back and neck. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit alleging the defendant's negligence in operating his vehicle, specifically an unsafe lane change that caused the collision. She asserted herniated cervical discs, along with back and neck sprains and strains. She underwent physical therapy and received lumbar injections, testifying to ongoing pain that limited her daily activities. The plaintiff sought damages for past and future medical expenses, pain and suffering, mental anguish, and physical impairment. The defendant countered that an unknown vehicle had cut him off, forcing him to swerve. While the police report noted an unknown vehicle, the investigating officer faulted the defendant for an unsafe lane change. The defense questioned the reasonableness and necessity of the plaintiff's medical treatment, noting a prior motor vehicle accident and attorney involvement in treatment decisions. A defense expert opined that a significantly lower amount for past medical expenses would have been reasonable. The jury returned a defense verdict. It found negligence and proximate cause applied solely to the unknown driver, not the named defendant. Although the jury answered the damages question and awarded $3,500, the plaintiff took nothing from the named defendant because no liability was assigned to the defendant.
On March 1, 2015, a student driving a pickup truck in Allen, Texas, was rear-ended by a sports car while stopped at a light. The student, who became the plaintiff, alleged negligence by the sports car's driver, the defendant, claiming injuries to the back, head, and neck. The defendant denied negligence, attributing the collision to brake failure, though he acknowledged not having his brakes checked after the incident. The plaintiff reported immediate neck, back, and head pain, receiving a concussion diagnosis at an emergency room before being released. Following physical therapy and cervical and lumbar MRIs that showed a disc herniation and bulging discs, the plaintiff ceased treatment for over two years. In October 2017, the plaintiff sought further care, including an epidural steroid injection and a recommendation for cervical discectomy and fusion surgery. A neuropsychologist later diagnosed post-concussion syndrome. The plaintiff's orthopedic surgeon testified that all treatments were reasonable, necessary, accident-related, and that the recommended surgery would cost approximately $150,000. The defense's orthopedic expert countered, stating the cervical MRI indicated only a disc bulge, not a herniation, and that lumbar findings were minor, precluding the need for further surgery. The defense argued the plaintiff's neck injury and neuropsychological issues likely stemmed from playing football, highlighted the referral of the plaintiff to a surgeon by an attorney, and emphasized the significant gap in treatment. After a two-day trial and 1.25 minutes of deliberation, the jury found the defendant negligent and awarded the plaintiff $255,500. Subsequently, the parties settled for $283,915.76, which included prejudgment interest and taxable costs, in lieu of a judgment being entered.
One driver was stopped in traffic when their vehicle was struck from behind by another vehicle. The driver who was rear-ended claimed injuries to their back and neck. The case proceeded to trial to determine damages, as liability was conceded.
A plaintiff filed a lawsuit alleging negligence after a defendant's vehicle struck the plaintiff's automobile, causing the rear window to shatter. The plaintiff claimed to suffer neck and back injuries, diagnosed as cervical and lumbar sprain/strain, and reported ongoing back spasms and pain despite physical therapy. The defendant denied the negligence allegations, disputed liability, and challenged the nature, extent, and damages associated with the plaintiff's alleged injuries. The case proceeded to trial in Texas. Following deliberations, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, awarding $16,500 in damages.