Texas Verdict News

Browse all verdict news articles from Texas.

Commercial Trucking Crash

$20 Million Webb County Trucking Verdict Is the Largest Personal Injury Award in County History

A Webb County jury has returned a verdict exceeding $20 million against Wisconsin-based motor carrier Marten Transport, LTD the largest reported personal injury jury verdict in Webb County history. The verdict came after a five-day trial and approximately five hours of deliberation in the 341st District Court of Webb County, presided over by the Honorable Judge Beckie Palomo. The plaintiff suffered catastrophic, life-altering injuries after a Marten Transport driver made an illegal left turn from the far-right lane at an industrial intersection in Laredo, Texas.From Zero Offer to $20 Million: How the Case Unfolded Before litigation was filed, Marten Transport and its defense team denied liability entirely and offered zero dollars to resolve the claim. As the trial date approached, the defense raised its offer to $750,000. The jury's answer was $20 million. The trial team was led by Will Clark, founding attorney of The Injury Law Guides (TILG), who is Board Certified in Personal Injury Trial Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization. Clark, who launched his legal career practicing in Laredo, described the result as personally significant. "Having launched my legal career practicing personal injury law in Laredo, returning to Webb County to secure justice for a client who endured such catastrophic loss felt like coming home," Clark stated.What Happened on February 3, 2022 The crash occurred at an industrial intersection in Laredo on February 3, 2022, when a commercial truck driver employed by Marten Transport attempted a left turn from the far-right lane. An independent eyewitness, a CDL-licensed driver, testified that the truck activated a right turn signal before turning left. The witness observed the plaintiff traveling approximately 30 to 40 mph as he approached the intersection, leaving no time to avoid the collision. The investigating officer's crash report placed sole responsibility on the Marten Transport driver, who was cited at the scene. Marten Transport terminated the driver the same day the crash occurred and assessed internal penalty points, including points for failure to yield the right of way.The Defense Theory the Jury Rejected The defense argued the plaintiff was traveling 65 mph in a 35-mph zone and failed to react appropriately to avoid the collision. The jury rejected that reconstruction analysis entirely. Instead, jurors credited the crash report, dash camera footage, and eyewitness testimony, all of which supported a speed consistent with the plaintiff's account roughly half what the defense claimed. Defense-retained medical and psychological experts also testified but conceded key points regarding the plaintiff's injuries and his mental health condition following the crash.Catastrophic Injuries With Lasting Consequences The plaintiff sustained multiple serious injuries in the collision, including: Nasal bone fracture Right inferior orbital rim fracture Right femoral fracture Right greater trochanter fracture Mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) Neck injury requiring ongoing pain management Lumbar injury requiring laminectomy surgery In the months following the crash, the plaintiff experienced significant mental duress. The defense attempted to attribute his psychological condition to preexisting factors. The plaintiff's legal team presented expert testimony connecting his ongoing suffering directly to the crash and its physical, emotional, and financial consequences. Family members testified about the profound impact on the household, including financial strain and drastic lifestyle changes caused by the plaintiff's inability to function as he had before the crash.Why This Webb County Trucking Verdict Matters Laredo is no ordinary Texas city. The Port of Laredo handled $354 billion in total trade with the world in 2025, ranking it the number one port among all U.S. border crossings. Commercial truck traffic is constant and heavy, and the risks to passenger vehicle drivers sharing those industrial corridors are real. This verdict signals that Webb County juries hold commercial carriers to a high standard of care. When a trucking company's driver causes a catastrophic crash through an illegal maneuver, and the company responds with denial and low-ball offers, the community's assessment of accountability can look very different from the defense's. Plaintiff attorneys who handle commercial trucking cases in Texas and across the border region should take note of both the result and the trial strategy: eyewitness testimony, dash cam footage, the crash report, and the trucking company's own post-crash conduct combined to make a compelling case that the jury accepted in full. If you are a plaintiff attorney with significant trucking verdicts or settlements on your record, Major Verdict is the only platform where you can publicly display those results and let your trial record speak for itself. Create your free profile today.

Commercial Trucking Crash
Workplace Death
Auto Accident

Jury Awards $373,922 in Virginia Car Accident Verdict After Henrico County Sideswipe Collision

A Henrico County jury awarded $373,922 to the plaintiff in Stuart v. Presley on January 21, 2026, after a sideswipe collision that the defense described as minor and that caused minimal visible property damage. The Virginia car accident verdict came after the insurance carrier, Safeco, offered just $20,000 to settle the case, making the jury's award nearly 19 times the pre-trial offer. The case was tried before Judge Rondelle D. Herman in Henrico County Circuit Court. Plaintiff attorneys Sharif Gray, Gray Broughton, and Zachary Grubaugh of Gray Broughton Injury Law in Richmond represented the injured party.How the Sideswipe Collision Led to Surgery The plaintiff was involved in a sideswipe collision in Henrico County that produced minimal property damage. Despite the low-impact appearance of the crash, the plaintiff sustained a torn rotator cuff that required surgical intervention. The defense admitted liability just hours before trial, shifting the entire dispute to damages. The central question for the jury became whether the collision actually caused the plaintiff's shoulder injury or whether the condition existed before the crash.The Defense Strategy: Pre-Existing Injury and Treatment Gap The defense built its case around two arguments. First, a defense orthopedic expert testified that the plaintiff's torn rotator cuff was pre-existing. The expert pointed to the fact that the plaintiff had undergone rotator cuff surgery on his other shoulder just over a year before the collision. Second, the defense highlighted a nine-month gap in treatment between the collision and when the plaintiff sought care for the injury at issue. The defense argued this gap undermined the claim that the crash caused the rotator cuff tear. These are common defense tactics in low-property-damage cases. Insurance carriers frequently rely on prior medical history and treatment gaps to minimize the value of a claim or deny causation altogether.Why the Jury Rejected a $20,000 Offer and Returned $373,922 Safeco's highest settlement offer before trial was $20,000. The case proceeded to a one-day jury trial, and the jury returned a verdict of $373,922 for the plaintiff. The gap between the carrier's offer and the jury's award is striking. It suggests that the jury found the plaintiff's testimony and evidence about the injury more credible than the defense's pre-existing condition argument. It also reflects what plaintiff attorneys across the country see regularly: carriers undervaluing claims involving low property damage, only to face significantly larger verdicts at trial.What This Virginia Car Accident Verdict Signals for Plaintiff Attorneys The Stuart v. Presley result is a useful data point for attorneys handling cases where the defense leans on minimal property damage to suppress settlement value. Several aspects of this case stand out for practitioners. The defense conceded liability on the eve of trial, a move that can sometimes work in the defense's favor by focusing the jury solely on damages. Here, that strategy did not pay off. The jury awarded nearly 19 times what Safeco had offered. The nine-month treatment gap and prior shoulder surgery on the opposite side gave the defense real ammunition, yet the jury still returned a six-figure verdict. This outcome suggests that when the surgical evidence supports causation, juries can see past treatment gaps and prior injury history. For plaintiff attorneys who handle disputed-causation cases, this verdict from Henrico County Circuit Court sends a clear message. Taking a case to trial can produce results that far exceed what the carrier puts on the table. Browse the latest verdict news on Major Verdict to track outcomes like this one. Verdicts like this one deserve to be seen. Major Verdict is the only platform where plaintiff attorneys can publicly display their trial results and settlements for free. Create your profile today and let your record speak for itself. If you or someone you know has been injured in a car accident, find a plaintiff lawyer on Major Verdict with a proven trial record in your state.

Verdict News by State

Member Search

Latest Featured Members

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4 Sample 5 Sample 6 Sample 7 Sample 8 Sample 9 Sample 10 Sample 11 Sample 12
Sample 13 Sample 14 Sample 15 Sample 16 Sample 17 Sample 18 Sample 19 Sample 20 Sample 21 Sample 22 Sample 23 Sample 24
Sample 32 Sample 25 Sample 26 Sample 27 Sample 28 Sample 29 Sample 30 Sample 31 Sample 33 Sample 34 Sample 35 Sample 36
Sample 37 Sample 38 Sample 39>
                            <img src= Sample 41 Sample 42 Sample 43 Sample 44 Sample 45 Sample 46 Sample 47 Sample 48

Plaintiff trial attorneys. Join now for free!

ShowcaseYour Experience

Major Verdict gives you a professional platform to showcase your hard-earned trial verdicts and notable settlements on your free public profile. You pick what to share and can always edit your entries. Preserve the details of cases you worked on for years to win, build a public record of your results, and let your experience speak for itself to potential clients and peers nationwide.