Houston Jury Awards $106,495 in Rear-End Collision UIM Dispute

In Plano, Texas, a collision occurred on the President George Bush Turnpike when a loan officer, driving a Mercedes-Benz sedan, stopped at a yield sign and was rear-ended by another vehicle. The plaintiff, the driver of the Mercedes-Benz, filed a lawsuit alleging negligence against the defendant, claiming failures to maintain a proper lookout, control speed, avoid following too closely, and brake to prevent the accident. The defendant stipulated to liability, and the case proceeded to determine damages. The plaintiff claimed the accident caused a lumbar disc bulge, along with neck and left shoulder sprains and strains. She underwent chiropractic care and saw a pain management specialist, who recommended epidural steroid injections which she did not receive. The plaintiff testified that her lower back pain persisted, impacting her ability to bike with her daughter and run competitively. She sought nearly $21,000 for past medical bills, $1,880 for past lost wages, and additional damages for future medical care, future lost earnings, and past and future pain and impairment, totaling approximately $80,000. Her treating doctor testified that her back pain could require future chiropractic care. The defense disputed the extent of the plaintiff's damages, arguing the impact was minor, citing minimal damage to the plaintiff's vehicle. Defense counsel challenged the plaintiff's credibility, highlighting inconsistencies between her trial and deposition testimony regarding the impact's severity, and questioning her physical difficulties in court. A defense expert opined that the duration and cost of the plaintiff's medical treatment were excessive, and the defense noted all treatment was attorney-referred. The defense suggested an award of $5,000 for past medical bills and zero for other damages. After a two-day trial and four hours of deliberation, the jury awarded the plaintiff $7,721 for past medical bills only. However, due to a pre-existing high-low agreement between the parties, with parameters set between $20,000 and $49,500, the defendant's insurer paid the plaintiff $20,000, plus a portion of taxable costs.

On January 3, 2017, a collision occurred on U.S. Highway 75 in Allen, Texas. A sedan, driven by the plaintiff, was traveling northbound when a pickup truck, driven by the defendant, entered the plaintiff's lane. The rear corner of the pickup truck struck the front corner of the sedan. The plaintiff sustained back and neck injuries, including herniated discs and sprains, and subsequently filed a lawsuit alleging the defendant's negligent operation of his vehicle, specifically an unsafe lane change. The plaintiff sought damages for past and future medical expenses, pain and suffering, mental anguish, and physical impairment, totaling approximately $66,500. The defendant countered that an unknown vehicle had cut him off, forcing him to swerve into the plaintiff's lane, and designated the unknown driver as a responsible third party. While a police report diagram showed an unknown vehicle, the investigating officer primarily faulted the defendant for an unsafe lane change and faulty evasive action. The defense also challenged the extent and necessity of the plaintiff's medical treatment, noting a history of prior accident-related medical claims and presenting expert testimony that reasonable past medical expenses would be significantly lower than claimed. Following a trial, the jury returned a defense verdict. Jurors found that negligence and proximate cause rested solely with the unknown driver, thereby absolving the defendant of liability. Although the jury did answer the damages question, awarding $3,500, the plaintiff ultimately received no compensation because the finding of liability did not extend to the defendant in the case.

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.

In January 2015, a plaintiff, a financial planner, was involved in a multi-vehicle collision on Eldorado Parkway in McKinney. The plaintiff's pickup truck was struck from the rear by another pickup, driven by a 16-year-old, which propelled the plaintiff's vehicle into a preceding car. The plaintiff initially reported neck, back, and head injuries, later alleging a traumatic brain injury and subsequent cognitive impairment. The plaintiff sued the teenage driver for negligence in operating the vehicle and initially sued the driver's parents, as owners of the vehicle, for negligent entrustment. Claims against the parents were later dismissed. The defendant driver conceded liability for the collision, and the trial proceeded solely on the issue of damages. The plaintiff sought over $812,000, including significant damages for loss of earning capacity, past and future mental anguish, and physical pain and impairment. An economist expert for the plaintiff testified to over $600,000 in lost earning capacity. The defense acknowledged soft-tissue injuries but disputed the severity and causation of the alleged traumatic brain injury. Defense counsel highlighted that the plaintiff initially denied injury at the scene, did not report head injury complaints for several months, and underwent neurological and neuropsychological testing that was largely normal. A defense neurology expert opined that memory and cognitive complaints were not caused by the accident, while a defense economics expert challenged the plaintiff's methodology for lost earning capacity. The defense also noted the plaintiff had not sought treatment for more than three years prior to trial. After a three-day trial, the jury deliberated for three hours and returned a verdict, awarding the plaintiff $22,000. However, the parties had previously entered a high-low agreement, setting parameters between $50,000 and $450,000. Pursuant to this agreement, the plaintiff recovered $50,000.

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.