Texas Jury Awards $170,850 After Comparative Liability in Rear-End Collision
One driver was traveling east on a boulevard in rainy conditions when he collided with the rear of a construction vehicle. The driver claimed the construction vehicle had no lights or warning signs, making it difficult to see. The defense argued the driver was speeding and potentially intoxicated. The driver sustained fractures and later developed an infection requiring multiple surgeries.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Plaintiff
- Amount
- $335,000
- County
- Harris County, TX
- Resolved
- 2015
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Leg / Foot Injury
- Accident Type
- Rear-end
- Case Type
- Motor Vehicle Negligence
Case Overview
On October 20, 2012, a plaintiff driving a 1989 Chevrolet Suburban was involved in a rear-end collision with an eastbound telehandler construction vehicle on Kingsland Boulevard during rainy conditions. The telehandler was owned by a masonry subcontractor working on a construction project for a general contractor. The plaintiff sustained multiple injuries and subsequently filed a negligence lawsuit against the telehandler operator, the subcontractor, and the general contractor.
The plaintiff alleged the defendants failed to provide adequate warning or notice of the construction activity, claiming the telehandler lacked lights and a slow-moving vehicle sign, making it impossible to see in the adverse weather. A construction safety expert for the plaintiff testified that the defendants had violated contractual agreements and state regulations by not providing warning devices such as flagmen or escort vehicles. An accident reconstruction expert stated the plaintiff was traveling at or under the speed limit at the time of the impact. The plaintiff suffered compound fractures to the right tibia and talus, which led to multiple surgeries, a staph infection requiring additional debridements, and a bone graft. The plaintiff claimed significant scarring, a permanent severe limp, and sought damages for past medical expenses, as well as past and future pain and suffering, physical impairment, and disfigurement.
Defense counsel argued the plaintiff bore comparative liability, presenting a witness who testified the plaintiff was traveling at an excessive rate of speed just prior to the collision. The defense also maintained the plaintiff was intoxicated at the scene and failed to mitigate damages by leaving the hospital against medical advice and not adhering to physician's orders, including a failure to stop smoking, which allegedly caused the infection and prolonged healing. The plaintiff countered that no evidence of intoxication was produced, such as blood or urine tests, and that the plaintiff was retrieving a cell phone from the vehicle, which was visibly too damaged to drive.
After a three-day trial and 3.75 hours of deliberation, the jury found the telehandler operator 1% liable, the general contractor 15% liable, the subcontractor 35% liable, and the plaintiff 49% comparatively liable. The jury awarded the plaintiff $335,000, which was then reduced to $170,850 due to the finding of comparative liability.
VerdictlyTM Score
This outcome aligns very well with 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 know what your case might be worth?
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 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 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.
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 February 12, 2017, a plaintiff driving in Plano, Texas, slowed for traffic when their vehicle was rear-ended by an SUV. The plaintiff reported sustaining back and neck injuries from the collision. The plaintiff subsequently filed a lawsuit against the driver of the SUV, the vehicle's owner, and their own insurer for first-party benefits. The claims against the driver and vehicle owner were later discontinued after it was determined they were uninsured. The case then proceeded against the insurer, which conceded liability, focusing the trial solely on the issue of damages. The plaintiff claimed the accident aggravated pre-existing scoliosis and caused new injuries, including radiating pain and a cervical disc herniation. Evidence showed the plaintiff sought emergency medical care on the day of the accident and subsequently underwent extensive treatment, including chiropractic sessions, pain management procedures like lumbar and cervical rhizotomies, and epidural steroid injections over a two-year period. A medical expert for the plaintiff testified that the pre-existing scoliosis made the spine more susceptible to injury and attributed the treatment and complaints prior to a later motorcycle accident to the February 2017 collision. The defense, while conceding liability for the collision, disputed the extent of the claimed damages. Defense counsel argued that the accident did not aggravate the plaintiff's pre-existing conditions, that medical charges were excessive, and pointed to minimal damage to the vehicles and gaps in the plaintiff's treatment history. The defense suggested an award for only immediate medical expenses. After a two-day trial and two hours of deliberation, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, awarding $80,000. This amount included $35,000 for past medical costs, $22,500 for past physical pain, and $22,500 for past mental anguish.
On April 26, 2013, a three-vehicle rear-end collision occurred on Texas State Highway 75 in Plano. A Chevrolet Cobalt rear-ended a Nissan Maxima, causing the Maxima to then strike a Nissan Altima in front of it. The insurer of the Altima initially sued the drivers of the Maxima and the Cobalt for property damage, but these claims were resolved before trial. The driver of the Maxima, acting as the cross-plaintiff, then pursued claims against the driver of the Cobalt, who was the defendant, for personal injuries and property damage. The cross-plaintiff alleged the defendant failed to control speed and maintain a safe distance. Following the incident, the cross-plaintiff reported neck and lower back pain, undergoing chiropractic treatment for two months. Medical imaging allegedly revealed disc bulges and protrusions, and a cervical strain/sprain. The cross-plaintiff sought approximately $12,000 for medical costs, along with damages for past pain, physical impairment, and property damage, claiming inability to continue weightlifting or assist his son in football. The defendant's counsel, whose client did not appear at trial, countered that the cross-plaintiff had initially rear-ended the Altima and then slowed, leading to the second impact. The defense also argued any injuries would have resolved post-treatment. After a one-day trial in Plano, a jury found the defendant negligent and that this negligence was a factual cause of injury to the cross-plaintiff. The jury awarded the cross-plaintiff $22,500. This included $7,500 for past medical costs, $2,000 for past physical impairment, $3,000 for past pain and suffering, and $10,000 for property damage.
Explore More Cases Like This
Browse similar cases by injury type and location to get a better understanding of case values in your area.