2,421 Texas car accident cases analyzed. Here's what they resolved for.

A passenger in a vehicle was involved in a four-vehicle rear-end collision. The passenger claimed neck and back injuries. The passenger sued the driver of the vehicle behind them, alleging negligence caused the chain-reaction collision. The defense argued that another vehicle caused the initial impact. The jury found the defendant negligent and awarded damages.

One driver was traveling westbound when their vehicle was struck from behind by another vehicle. The driver who was struck from behind experienced pain in their neck and back and sought medical treatment. The jury found the defendant liable for causing the accident and awarded damages for past medical expenses, past pain and suffering, and future pain and suffering.

One driver was traveling on a service road when their vehicle was struck from behind. The driver who was hit experienced neck and back pain and sought medical treatment. The jury determined the other driver was responsible for the collision and awarded damages for medical expenses and pain and suffering.

One driver's vehicle was broadsided by another driver in a Houston intersection. The first driver's passengers were also injured. The jury found the second driver 100% liable for the collision. All three occupants of the first vehicle were awarded damages for their injuries.

One driver was stopped at a red light when the other driver collided with the back of their vehicle. This caused the stopped vehicle to hit the vehicle in front of it. The occupants of the stopped vehicle sued the driver who initiated the collision, claiming their negligence caused serious injuries and property damage. The case went to trial, and a jury found in favor of the injured parties.

A collision occurred when one driver struck the rear of another vehicle. A third vehicle then struck the second vehicle. The driver of the first vehicle sustained injuries to her neck, back, head, and body. The injured driver sued the other two drivers, alleging negligence. The defendants denied the allegations and raised various defenses, including comparative negligence and pre-existing conditions. The case went to trial, and a jury found in favor of the injured driver, awarding damages.

A collision occurred when one driver struck the rear of another vehicle. A third driver then hit the second vehicle. The driver who was initially rear-ended reported injuries to her neck, back, head, and body. Lawsuits were filed alleging negligence, including failure to maintain a proper lookout and safe following distance. Defenses included claims of the injured driver's own negligence and pre-existing conditions. The case went to trial, and a jury awarded damages to the injured driver.

One driver was stopped in traffic when their vehicle was struck by another vehicle, which had been pushed into it by a large truck. The case was tried to determine damages.

One driver was stopped at a stop sign when their car was rear-ended by another vehicle. The person in the stopped car claimed neck and back injuries. The case proceeded to trial on causation and damages after liability was admitted.

One driver was rear-ended by a pickup truck, causing her vehicle to hit the car in front. She claimed injuries to her back and neck, and sought medical expenses and pain and suffering. The jury awarded her over $100,000.

A driver pulled out from a restaurant and struck a vehicle, which then hit the plaintiff's car. The plaintiff claimed injuries to his neck and lower back, including disc bulges and herniations. He sought damages for past and future medical expenses, pain, and impairment. The defense argued that the plaintiff delayed treatment and that his claimed damages were excessive.

One driver was stopped when their vehicle was struck from behind in a chain reaction collision. The driver sustained serious spinal injuries. After settling with the at-fault driver, the injured driver pursued underinsured motorist benefits from their own insurance carrier. The insurance company denied the claim, but a jury found the injured driver was entitled to additional benefits.