San Antonio Rear-End Collision Back Injury Case Settles for $100,000

On February 20, 2015, a collision occurred on President George Bush Turnpike in Collin County involving a 2008 Chevrolet HHR driven by the plaintiff and a 2013 GMC Sierra driven by the defendant. The plaintiff alleged the defendant unsafely changed lanes, striking the plaintiff's vehicle, which then hit a concrete barrier. The plaintiff further claimed the defendant stopped suddenly on the shoulder, causing the plaintiff to rear-end the defendant. The plaintiff, who sustained neck, back, and knee injuries, subsequently filed a lawsuit alleging the defendant's negligence, including failure to maintain a single lane, unsafe lane change, improper lookout, and unsafe stopping. The defendant countered that the plaintiff initiated the collision by moving into the defendant's lane. The defendant stated that the plaintiff then stopped on the shoulder, and the defendant stopped normally about 100 yards ahead, before the plaintiff intentionally rear-ended the defendant. Following the collision, the plaintiff admitted to physically assaulting the defendant, citing anger over the incident and the defendant's alleged sudden stop. The plaintiff sought compensation for past medical bills totaling $22,469, past lost wages, and past and future pain, suffering, and mental anguish. The defense contended the plaintiff's claimed injuries were pre-existing and challenged the plaintiff's credibility, noting inconsistencies in past medical history and that the lost wage claim was supported solely by the plaintiff's testimony. After a two-day trial, the jury deliberated for two hours. The jury concluded that only the plaintiff was negligent in the incident and awarded zero damages.

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.

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 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.