Houston Jury Awards $330,000 in Rear-End Collision
One driver was operating a vehicle on a public road during rainy, dark conditions. The other party was operating heavy construction equipment on the same road. The driver collided with the rear of the construction equipment. Both parties were found to be negligent, with the injured driver bearing the majority of the fault.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Mixed
- Amount
- $330,000
- County
- Harris County, TX
- Resolved
- 2015
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Leg / Foot Injury
- Accident Type
- Rear-end
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence, Rear End Collision
Case Overview
On October 26, 2012, a plaintiff operating a vehicle on Kingsland Boulevard in Houston, Texas, collided with the rear of a slow-moving piece of heavy construction equipment. The incident occurred during dark and rainy conditions, and witnesses stated the machinery was not well lit. The plaintiff sustained fractures to the right tibia, fibula, and ankle, requiring surgery and subsequent treatment for an infection. These injuries resulted in permanent pain, a limp, and an altered gait.
The plaintiff filed a personal injury lawsuit, alleging the defendants negligently operated the construction equipment on a public roadway. Specific claims included failing to properly illuminate the machinery, not using an escort to warn drivers, and operating the equipment at a dangerously low speed. The defendants denied negligence, asserting that the plaintiff's inattentiveness or failure to maintain a proper lookout caused the collision, noting other traffic had observed and avoided the machinery.
A jury found both the plaintiff and the defendants negligent. Liability was apportioned at 49% to the plaintiff, 15% to the construction company that owned the equipment, 35% to the masonry company using it, and 1% to the equipment operator. The jury awarded the plaintiff $330,000 in total damages, which the court subsequently reduced based on the plaintiff's comparative negligence.
VerdictlyTM Score
This outcome differs from typical 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 check 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 Harris County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this 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.
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.
One driver was stopped at a red light when the other driver rear-ended their vehicle. The driver who was rear-ended claimed injuries to their neck and lower back. The other driver argued they were not negligent and that the impact was minor. The jury found the driver who caused the collision not liable.
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.
One driver was stopped in traffic when the other driver rear-ended her. The injured driver claimed neck and back strains, sprains, and shoulder pain. She also claimed anxiety for her unborn child. The defense argued that the defendant's actions did not cause the injuries and questioned the extent of the claimed damages.
Explore More Cases Like This
Browse similar cases by injury type and location to get a better understanding of case values in your area.