Plano Jury Issues Defense Verdict in Rear-End Collision

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 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.

On March 17, 2016, a four-vehicle accident occurred on Parker Road when a motorist stopped for a bush that had fallen onto the roadway. The initial plaintiff, the driver of the second vehicle from the front, subsequently filed a lawsuit against the three drivers behind her, alleging negligence in the operation of their vehicles. One of the defendants, the driver of the second vehicle in the chain, also filed cross-claims against the two drivers behind him, alleging their negligence. The initial plaintiff later non-suited her claims without settlement before trial. The case proceeded to trial on the cross-plaintiff's claims against the two drivers behind him. The cross-plaintiff alleged that the last driver in the chain was solely responsible for the collision, arguing that all other vehicles had stopped safely before the last driver rear-ended the third vehicle, initiating a series of impacts. The cross-plaintiff claimed back, neck, and shoulder injuries, seeking approximately $90,000 in damages for past and future medical expenses, lost wages, physical pain and mental anguish, and physical impairment. The cross-defendant, the last driver, argued that the fallen bush created a sudden emergency or that the accident was a mistake rather than an act of negligence. Alternatively, the cross-defendant contended that if any liability was found, the other drivers, including the cross-plaintiff and the initial plaintiff, were equally liable. Testimony from the initial plaintiff indicated the cross-plaintiff would have hit her vehicle regardless of a rear-end impact. The defense also highlighted that the cross-plaintiff's vehicle showed minor rear-end damage but significant front-end damage. After a one-day trial and 10 hours of deliberation, the jury rendered a defense verdict. The jury found no negligence on the part of any motorist involved in the collision.

In November 2011, a plaintiff's Honda Civic was rear-ended by a defendant's Ford Escape at an intersection in Allen, Texas. The plaintiff alleged she was stopped at a red light, and the defendant's negligence in maintaining proper lookout and speed caused the collision. The defendant denied negligence, claiming the plaintiff stopped suddenly after the light turned green and that the impact was slight. The plaintiff reported cervical and lumbar sprains and strains, seeking emergency room care and over two years of chiropractic and physical therapy. She also consulted an orthopedic specialist. Her claimed medical expenses exceeded $20,000, and she sought approximately $15,000 for pain and suffering, plus lost wages, totaling about $35,700. The defense countered that the injuries were largely pre-existing, noting the plaintiff's prior rear-end collision five months earlier that involved similar reported sprains. A defense orthopedic surgeon testified that while the current accident might have exacerbated existing injuries, much of the subsequent treatment, including a brain MRI for headaches, was unrelated. The defense argued that eight physical therapy sessions would have been reasonable for any new injuries. After a two-day trial and 45 minutes of deliberation, the jury found the defendant not negligent, and the plaintiff received no award.