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

One driver's vehicle collided with another vehicle, causing it to hit a third vehicle and roll over. The driver of the third vehicle claimed injuries to his head, including a concussion and post-concussion syndrome, leading to daily headaches and cognitive difficulties. He also experienced neck and back pain that resolved. The driver sought damages for lost earning capacity and noneconomic damages.

One vehicle lost control and hit a barrier, becoming disabled in a traffic lane. Another vehicle then rear-ended the disabled vehicle. One person died, and others sustained injuries. The police report cited contributing factors against both drivers involved in the collision.

A truck driver was injured when a water tank fell on his leg. The tank was part of a road reclamation system. The driver sued the system's manufacturer, alleging defects in its design and warnings. The manufacturer argued the tank was safe when delivered and was damaged by improper use. The jury found the manufacturer liable for design and marketing defects.

A storage tank designed and manufactured by the defendant toppled and struck a man in his early 40s, causing severe leg fractures. The plaintiff claimed the tank's design was unstable, leading to the incident. He stated he required multiple surgeries, experienced permanent pain and a limp, and could no longer work in a physical capacity. The plaintiff also reported suffering from PTSD. The defendant argued the tank was properly designed and that misuse by the employer caused the accident.

One driver was stopped to make a left turn when the other driver, who admitted to being distracted, rear-ended them at high speed. The injured driver was taken to the emergency room with neck pain and a head laceration. Later, they underwent a cervical fusion surgery and experienced symptoms of a mild traumatic brain injury and seizure-like symptoms. Medical bills exceeded $400,000.

A jury found a trucking company and its driver mostly at fault in a wrongful death case. The accident occurred when a truck driver stopped in a traffic lane after an object damaged her truck's brake line. The deceased driver collided with the stopped truck. The jury determined the trucking company and driver were negligent, as was the deceased driver to a lesser extent.

One driver was traveling south on a highway when he rear-ended another vehicle. The occupants of the first vehicle exited their cars, and the highway had no shoulder. A third driver, who was intoxicated, then struck one of the vehicles, pushing it into one of the occupants. Both occupants who exited their vehicles were killed. The intoxicated driver was later found guilty of driving while intoxicated.

One driver stopped a tractor-trailer on the highway just over a hill. The other driver crested the hill and struck the trailer. The collision resulted in injuries to the driver and her two sons, and tragically, the death of the younger son. The driver and the father of the deceased child sued the tractor-trailer driver and his employers, alleging negligence for stopping on the highway. The defense claimed the driver stopped due to a trailer light issue and was returning to the truck when the crash occurred.

A train struck a car crossing railroad tracks, resulting in the death of one occupant and severe injuries to another. The plaintiffs alleged the crossing was extra-hazardous due to poor visibility and lack of warning devices. The defendants argued the driver was at fault for running a stop sign and using a cell phone. The jury found both the railway company and the driver 50 percent responsible for the accident.

One driver struck a pedestrian in a grocery store parking lot. The pedestrian was walking in a crosswalk when the collision occurred. The pedestrian was dragged several yards after the impact. The jury found the driver 100% liable for the accident.

One driver was traveling westbound and ran a red light, colliding with another driver's vehicle. The collision caused severe injuries to one driver and injuries to their family members. The case involved multiple defendants, including the driver, their employer, and a logistics company. The plaintiffs alleged negligence in various aspects of the driver's operation and the companies' oversight. The defendants raised defenses including contributory negligence and preemption.

A rancher was on his ATV near his property entrance when an 18-wheeler reversed and collided with the ATV, pushing it about 15 feet. The rancher claimed neck injuries. The defense argued the truck did not strike the ATV and that the rancher was distracted. Medical experts disagreed on the cause and severity of the claimed injuries.