Dallas Jury Finds Split Liability in Pedestrian Crash, Awards $2,805
One person was crossing a street when they were hit by a turning car. The injured person claimed various strains and a laceration, seeking compensation for medical expenses and pain. The other driver argued the injured person was at fault and the impact was not severe enough to cause the claimed injuries.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Plaintiff
- Amount
- $5,500
- County
- Dallas County, TX
- Resolved
- 2015
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Back Strain / Soft Tissue
- Accident Type
- Pedestrian
- Case Type
- Strain, Cervical, Strain
Case Overview
On January 23, 2013, a pedestrian was involved in a collision with a southbound vehicle while crossing West Mockingbird Lane in Dallas. The pedestrian, who later became the plaintiff, filed a lawsuit alleging negligence against the driver of the vehicle, who became the defendant. Plaintiff's counsel contended the defendant made a right turn from a stop light onto West Mockingbird Lane without maintaining a proper lookout and struck the plaintiff.
The defendant denied negligence, arguing the plaintiff's own actions were the sole cause of the collision. Defense counsel asserted the plaintiff was crossing against a "do not walk" signal while the defendant had a green light before making the turn. The plaintiff claimed cervical, lumbar, left hip, and left knee muscle strains, along with a left arm laceration, and sought over $36,000 for medical expenses, disfigurement, and pain and suffering.
Defense counsel disputed the extent of the plaintiff's injuries, maintaining the impact was minor, involving only the plaintiff placing hands on the vehicle's hood without falling. The defense also argued the arm laceration was a pre-existing condition, presenting medical records to support this claim. Following a one-day trial and three days of deliberation, a jury found the defendant 51 percent liable and the plaintiff 49 percent liable. The plaintiff was awarded $5,500, which was then reduced to $2,805 due to comparative liability.
VerdictlyTM Score
This outcome is within expected ranges
This score is calculated by analyzing injury type, accident details, geographic location, temporal trends, and comparing against 2,000+ similar cases in our database.
Curious about 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.
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.
On December 12, 2012, a collision occurred in McKinney, Texas, involving a vehicle driven by the plaintiff, a convenience store clerk, and a vehicle operated by the defendant. The plaintiff was traveling northbound on Custer Road when the defendant, who was at a stop sign on Cotton Ridge Road, attempted a right turn. The plaintiff's vehicle struck the defendant's vehicle in the middle northbound lane of Custer Road. The plaintiff subsequently filed a lawsuit, alleging the defendant negligently entered the lane, failed to keep a proper lookout, yield the right of way, and make a safe turn. The plaintiff claimed multiple injuries from the incident. An eyewitness testified that the defendant's vehicle entered the plaintiff's lane, and both the eyewitness and the investigating officer attributed fault to the defendant. The defendant, however, denied negligence, testifying that her vehicle sustained no damage and she was unsure if contact occurred. She asserted she turned into the right lane, not the middle lane, and suggested the plaintiff may have drifted. The defense also argued the investigating officer did not witness the accident, that the corner lacked adequate lighting, and that the plaintiff's vehicle damage might have been pre-existing. The defense impeached the plaintiff regarding the time of day the accident occurred. The plaintiff claimed neck and back sprains, hip and shoulder injuries, headaches, a concussion, and post-concussion syndrome, undergoing treatment with a chiropractor, neurologist, and pain management specialist. The plaintiff sought compensation for past medical bills totaling over $37,000, along with non-economic damages. The defense countered by highlighting the plaintiff's extensive history of prior neck, back, and shoulder injuries and treatments. A defense expert, an orthopedic surgeon, testified that only a limited number of chiropractic visits were medically necessary due to the accident, estimating the related medical costs at approximately $2,000. After a one-day trial and four hours of deliberation, the jury found the defendant solely negligent. The jury awarded the plaintiff $38,842.97 in damages.
One driver stopped for a school bus and was hit from behind by a pickup truck. The pickup truck driver was distracted by a cell phone call. The injured driver claimed back and neck injuries. The case proceeded to trial against the pickup truck driver and his employer.
A minor sustained back, head, and neck injuries in a motor vehicle accident in Texas. The plaintiff subsequently filed a personal injury lawsuit, alleging the incident caused the injuries and seeking damages. During the proceedings, the plaintiff presented expert testimony from a neurologist specializing in pain management, a neuropsychologist, and an economist. The defense called an expert in aerospace and occupational medicine. The case concluded with an award of $27,255.