Traumatic Brain Injury Car Accident Jury Verdict

$1.8 Million Jury Verdict in Car Accident with Traumatic Brain Injury.
Our client was a 19-year-old young man who had recently completed high school. He was returning from a casino in West Virginia when eastbound traffic was stopped on I-70. The client stopped his SUV behind another stopped vehicle. A van owned by an electrical company also was traveling eastbound, when the driver failed to stop. The van crashed into a Toyota, and then into the rear of the client’s SUV, propelling it forward into another car stopped in the lane ahead.
A total of six vehicles were involved in the chain collision. The Maryland State Police CRASH Team investigated the collision, and determined that the van driver had a 900-foot unobstructed sight distance before the area of initial impact. A MSP accident reconstructionist concluded that his negligence was the sole cause of the chain collision.
The van driver claimed that the Toyota had left the highway first, collided with the guardrail in the median, then re-entered the highway immediately in front of his van, and therefore was the sole proximate cause of the initial collision.
The client sustained facial lacerations and abrasions; blunt laryngeal trauma; glass embedded in his neck; neck sprain/strain; exacerbation and worsening of a pre-existing lumbar condition; concussion; a traumatic brain injury; and various psychological disorders from the traumatic brain injury.
The insurance company offered $50,000.00 to settle the client’s claim. We rejected the offer and went to trial. The trial lasted five weeks. After only about four hours of deliberations, the jury returned a verdict for the client, finding that the van driver’s negligence was the sole proximate cause of the collisions. They awarded $118,383.47 in past medical expenses (full amount requested); $235,00.00 in future medical expenses; $30,000.00 in past lost income; $600,000.00 in future lost income; and $900,000.00 in non-economic damages. Total verdict: $1,883,383.47.
The verdict was so high that the trial judge later concluded that it “shocked the conscience of the court,” and offered the client a choice between a new trial or accepting a lesser amount. Effectively, the trial judge overrode the verdict of the citizens chosen from the community to render justice. Insurance companies often have resources far greater than individuals, and this sometimes operates to place citizens at a distinct disadvantage. Here, the client chose to accept the trial judge’s choice of either accepting $350,000.00, or being forced to incur the substantial cost and expense of a re-trial.

Note – Every case is different. Our past record is no assurance that we will be successful in reaching a similar, or favorable, result in any future case.


  • Jonathan Scott Smith 10490 Little Patuxent Parkway, Suite 200 ,Columbia, MD 21044-4960

  • Call for consultation 410-740-0101