In car accident cases, it is not uncommon for a defendant to argue that a collision was low-impact and, therefore, could not have caused the plaintiff’s harm. Some defendants will go so far as to retain a biomechanical engineer to support such assertions. While defendants have the right to rely on expert testimony, such testimony must be relevant and helpful to the jury; otherwise, it will be precluded, as shown in Jesus Jimenez Escamilla, Jr., v. Gabriela Estrada, (No. 05-23-00236-CV) a recent ruling issued by a Texas court.  If you suffered injuries in a car accident, it is smart to talk to a Texas car accident lawyer as soon as possible.

History of the Case

It is alleged that in October 2017, the defendant rear-ended the plaintiff at an intersection in Dallas, Texas. The defendant, driving a Nissan Titan pickup truck, felt a “soft bump” during the collision, while the plaintiff, driving a Chevrolet Camaro, initially indicated she was not injured and did not feel any pain. However, upon returning home, the plaintiff noticed pain in her neck and back. Two weeks later, she visited the hospital, where X-rays showed spondylosis and degeneration but no fractures.

Reportedly, in January 2018, the plaintiff saw an orthopedic surgeon who suggested her injuries were caused or worsened by the accident. She was referred to a double board-certified doctor in anesthesiology and pain management. An MRI revealed cervical radiculopathy with cervical disk herniation. In March 2019, the plaintiff filed a negligence suit against the defendant, alleging his conduct was the proximate cause of her injuries. The parties entered into a Rule 11 Agreement in which the defendant stipulated to causing the accident, leading to a jury trial on the causation of the plaintiff’s injuries and damages. Continue Reading

Many people in Texas drive company vehicles or routinely travel for work. If a person causes a car crash while they are in the performance of job duties, anyone injured in the crash may not only be able to pursue claims against them as an individual but may also be able to seek compensation from their employer. As discussed in a recent Texas case, Sarah Cook v. Texas Highway Walls, LLC (NO. 03-22-00736-CV), an employer cannot avoid liability if there is evidence that the employee who caused the collision was acting as their agent. If you were hurt in a motor vehicle collision, you may be owed damages, and it is in your best interest to confer with a Texas car accident lawyer at your earliest convenience.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant and his company following injuries sustained in a motor vehicle collision. The plaintiff alleged negligence and gross negligence against both defendants and further claimed that the company was vicariously liable for The defendant’s actions.

Allegedly, the incident occurred when the defendant, driving a company-branded truck, collided with the plaintiff’s vehicle as she slowed for a red light. The defendant, an owner and vice president at the company, admitted to being distracted while driving. The company moved for summary judgment, which the district court granted, severing the claims against the company for separate adjudication. The plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading

Car accidents are common throughout Texas, often causing substantial injuries. People involved in collisions will often pursue damages from the responsible parties. As discussed in a recent Texas car accident case, Varavoot Anantasomboon v. Ashley Waggoner (No. 05-23-00390-CV), even if a plaintiff proves a defendant’s negligence caused a crash, they will not be rewarded damages unless they also demonstrate causation. If you sustained injuries in a car accident, it is critical to retain a Texas car accident lawyer to help you fight to protect your interests.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff and defendant were involved in an automobile accident in July 2019. The plaintiff subsequently filed a negligence suit against the defendant, seeking damages for alleged neck, back, and shoulder injuries. The trial took place in January 2023; the jury found that the defendant’s negligence caused the accident. When asked about compensating the plaintiff for medical expenses, past and future pain, and suffering, the jury awarded zero damages in all categories. Consequently, the trial court entered a judgment awarding the plaintiff zero damages and allowing the defendant to recover her costs from the plaintiff.

Allegedly, the plaintiff filed a motion to modify the judgment and for a new trial, arguing that the jury’s zero-damages verdict was against the overwhelming evidence and manifestly unjust, considering his medical expenses exceeded $30,000. The plaintiff also contended that the defendant should not have been awarded costs since he prevailed on the negligence question. After the trial court denied his motion, the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading

Many businesses use trucking companies to transport their products in and around Texas. While the size of tractor trailers makes them efficient for hauling goods, it also creates substantial risks for other people on the road, as collisions involving commercial trucks are frequently deadly. People hurt in such crashes can often recover damages from both the driver of the truck and their employer. However, as demonstrated in a recent Texas ruling issued in a truck accident case, JNM Express, et al. v. Lauro Lozano Jr. and Irene Lozano (No. 21-0853), it is not always readily evident who employs a truck driver and is therefore responsible for the harm they cause. If you were hurt in a truck collision, it is crucial to confer with a Texas truck accident lawyer about your rights as soon as possible.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is alleged that the plaintiff and a truck driver were involved in a collision. The collision, which caused the plaintiff severe injuries, was caused by the truck driver falling asleep at the wheel. The plaintiff subsequently filed a lawsuit seeking damages from the defendant trucking company and the defendant brokerage companies, both of which he alleged were the driver’s employers, alleging negligence and gross negligence against the companies and their owners.

Reportedly, following a trial, the jury awarded substantial damages, including exemplary damages against the companies. The trial court held all defendants jointly and severally liable for the damages. Following an appeal, the court of appeals affirmed most of the judgment but eliminated joint and several liability for exemplary damages against the owners. The defendants then filed a petition for review, which the court granted. Continue Reading

It is not uncommon for people to have jobs that require them to travel to different locations on a regular basis. In such instances, employers will often provide their employees with company vehicles. Doing so could potentially expose the employer to liability, however, if the employee subsequently causes a collision while using the employer’s vehicle, and people suffer injuries as a result of the crash. People pursuing claims against employers for harm caused by an employee’s car accident must demonstrate that the employer’s negligence directly led to the crash in question, however, otherwise their claims may be dismissed, as demonstrated recently in Jesus Yanez v. Oilpatch NDT, LLC (NO. 14-23-00417-CV), a Texas car accident case. If you suffered harm in a crash, it is smart to talk to a Texas car accident lawyer regarding what claims you may be able to pursue.

History of the Case

It is reported that in late December 2018, the defendant driver visited a friend’s apartment to watch soccer games. He was not working at the time but was driving his employer’s vehicle as his own car was non-functional. He consumed alcohol excessively during the gathering and, while driving home later, blacked out. The defendant driver then collided with the plaintiff’s pickup truck, resulting in significant damage to both vehicles and non-life-threatening injuries to both drivers.

Allegedly, the defendant driver’s blood alcohol level was found to be well above the legal limit, and he was charged with driving while intoxicated. The plaintiff subsequently sued the defendant driver and the defendant employer, alleging negligent supervision and training. The defendant employer moved for dismissal via summary judgment. The court granted the motion, prompting the plaintiff to appeal. Continue Reading

Car accidents, unfortunately, occur with regularity in Texas, and while some are minor, many cause substantial harm. People injured in collisions have the right to pursue claims against the responsible parties, but if they fail to adequately demonstrate the crash in question was caused by another person’s negligence, their quest for justice may be denied. While there are grounds for vacating unfavorable verdicts in car accident cases, courts do not grant such requests lightly, as demonstrated in a recent Texas case, Mark Mandel v. Aaron Paul Cooper et al. (No. 06-23-00062-CV). If you were hurt in a car accident caused by someone else’s carelessness, you could be owed damages, and it is in your best interest to speak to a Texas car accident lawyer about your options.

Factual and Procedural History of the Case

It is reported that following a collision on an interstate highway, the plaintiff sued the defendant. The plaintiff’s complaint alleged that the defendant, who was working for a company at the time of the accident, negligently collided with his truck. The plaintiff further contended that the defendant’s employer, the company for which the defendant was working during the collision, should also be held liable.

It is alleged that at trial, both parties presented conflicting testimonies regarding the circumstances leading to the accident. The plaintiff claimed that his truck was properly lit and safely parked on the shoulder, while the defendant argued that the plaintiff’s truck was not adequately visible, partially obstructing the roadway. The jury ultimately found that neither party was negligent, resulting in a take-nothing judgment against the plaintiff. The plaintiff appealed the trial court’s judgment, asserting multiple errors. Continue Reading

People involved in car accidents often suffer substantial losses. As such, they will frequently choose to pursue claims against the parties responsible for the collision. In order to prevail, they must demonstrate liability, which means, in part, they have to prove causation. Medical records are usually a key component in proving fault in car crash cases, and as discussed in a recent opinion issued in In Re Westside Roofing, LLC and Paul Scott Lowery (No. 03-23-00219-CV), a Texas car accident case, they are typically relevant and discoverable. If you sustained injuries in a collision caused by another party’s reckless actions, you have the right to pursue compensation, and you should consult a Texas car accident lawyer to assess your potential claims.

Case Setting

It is reported that the plaintiff sustained injuries in a collision with a truck driven by the defendant driver, who was an employee of the defendant company. The accident occurred when the defendant driver attempted to pass the plaintiff’s vehicle, resulting in contact between the truck’s rear bumper and the plaintiff’s vehicle. The plaintiff, claiming severe bodily injuries, sought damages exceeding $1 million.

Allegedly, the defendants disputed causation and sought extensive medical records from the plaintiff’s treating physicians, extending six years before the collision. The plaintiff moved to quash the discovery, alleging it was overbroad and irrelevant to the claims. The trial court conducted a hearing, after which it granted the motion to quash as to some, but not all, of the plaintiff’s providers. The defendants filed a petition for a writ of mandamus, asserting an abuse of discretion by the trial court in quashing the discovery. Continue Reading

Most car accidents that occur in Texas are caused to some degree by negligence. While in many instances, the negligent act that causes a collision is careless driving, in some cases, the negligent performance of professional duties, such as designing and executing traffic plans, may be to blame. While injured parties have the right to pursue claims against engineering firms and other negligent parties that may have contributed to their harm, they must meet any applicable procedural requirements; otherwise, their claims may be dismissed, as illustrated in a recent Texas case, Lina T. Ramey & Associates, Inc. v. Dana Wilkie, et al. No. 05-23-00562-CV. If you were hurt in a collision brought about by another party’s carelessness, it is smart to talk to a Texas car accident attorney about what steps you can take to protect your rights.

Factual History of the Case and Procedural Background

It is reported that the decedent was involved in a head-on collision with another driver in March 2021 on a portion of a Texas highway that was under construction. The plaintiffs, representatives of the decedent’s estate, sued the defendant, a civil engineering firm involved in the traffic control plan for the construction. The plaintiffs alleged negligence and premises liability, asserting that the defendants’ flawed plan caused the collision.

Allegedly, the defendants moved to dismiss, arguing non-compliance with section 150.002 of the Civil Practice and Remedies Code, as the plaintiffs’ complaint was not accompanied by a certificate of merit signed by a licensed Texas engineer. The plaintiffs contended a certificate of merit wasn’t needed for claims related to the defendant’s failure to inspect the site, as it wasn’t engineering design. The trial partially granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss, allowing the claims related to lane markings to proceed, and the defendant appealed. Continue Reading

It is not uncommon for employees of municipal entities to be involved in collisions while in the course of their work. While such entities may be liable for any harm caused by such crashes, people pursuing claims against cities must comply with the requirements set forth under the Texas Torts Claims Act, as discussed in Brian F. Wilson v. City of Houston (NO. 14-22-00666-CV), a recent Texas car accident case. If you were injured in a car crash, you have the right to seek damages from the responsible parties, and you should speak to a Texas car accident attorney as soon as possible.

Case Background

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant City, alleging negligence and other causes of action after a collision between his vehicle and a City fire truck responding to an emergency call in September 2017. The plaintiff initiated the legal proceedings in September 2019, asserting claims under the Texas Torts Claim Act (TTCA) and additional allegations, including negligence, gross negligence, negligence per se, negligent entrustment, negligent hiring, and exemplary damages.

Allegedly, in response, the defendant filed a combined traditional and no-evidence motion for summary judgment, contending, among other things, that Wilson failed to provide timely notice of his claims as required by the TTCA. The trial court granted the motion, prompting the plaintiff to appeal. Continue Reading

Car accidents are common in Texas, and while some people involved in collisions are fortunate enough to walk away unscathed, many sustain significant trauma. Regardless, it is not uncommon for defendants in car accident cases to argue that a plaintiff’s harm arose out of something other than the subject collision. Recently, in the case of Rankin v. Hernandez, the plaintiffs, Erica Hernandez, Delcia Saldana, and Chantay Solano (NO. 14-22-00565-CV), the Court of Appeals of Texas Houston (14th Dist.) discussed what constitutes sufficient evidence to establish causation in car accident cases. If you were hurt in a collision, you may be owed compensation, and you should talk to a Texas car accident about your possible claims.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiffs were involved in a car accident when they were rear-ended by a vehicle driven by the defendant. Following the accident, the plaintiffs sought medical treatment for neck and back injuries from a chiropractor. They subsequently filed a negligence lawsuit against the defendant, seeking damages for their injuries. The case proceeded to a jury trial.

Allegedly, the jury returned a verdict awarding a total of $143,000 in damages for the three plaintiffs. The defendant appealed, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to establish a causal relationship between the accident and the injuries claimed by the plaintiffs. Continue Reading

Contact Information