A friend of mine looked up Mr. Grossman on the internet and he drove out to Longview, TX, which is a couple hour drive, to see me while I was pretty much on my death bed. He came out there and it's been a situation where I wouldn't have been able to do what I've done without him.
-
C. Arguetta
Automobile Accident Case
Common Injuries in Car Accidents
Injured Your Head, Neck or Back in an Accident? Discuss Your Case With Our Law Firm
Even a relatively minor car accident can cause serious injury. While there are many different kinds of injuries that can result from a car accident, some of the most common are injuries to the head, neck, or spine. Head injuries can cause serious brain damage. These types of injuries are common in side-impact collisions and can leave a victim with permanent mental disability.
Spinal cord injuries are similar in that they can occur in even a small accident but can result in serious disability, including life-long paralysis. Any head or back injury could cause brain or spinal cord damage, leading to permanent disability. Whiplash is another common car accident injury and, in severe cases, it can also cause nerve damage.
If you or someone you love has suffered a head, neck, or back injury in a car accident, the Dallas auto accident lawyers at Grossman Law Offices can help you receive compensation. A Dallas lawyer personal injury lawsuit will help you receive financial compensation for your past and future medical expenses, any lost wages, and the mental/emotional turmoil caused by your accident. But this lawsuit may be more difficult than it appears, particularly if commercial vehicles, drunk drivers, or mechanical defects were involved in the accident. Car accident cases often come down to factors that aren’t even apparent at the time of the accident. Without proper legal experience, you will have a hard time adjusting your legal strategy to account for these variables. Our Dallas attorneys have been helping car accident victims for twenty years and we know how to handle the unique legal difficulties that often arise in these cases. If you or someone in your family has been hurt in a car accident, contact the Dallas vehicle accident lawyers at Grossman Law Offices and get the compensation you deserve.
Related articles:
Questions answered by this article:
What are some common car accident injuries?What should I do if I have injured my head, neck or back in a car crash??
Some of Our Most Recent Successful Cases
$210,000.00 Recovery - Automobile Accident (Neck Injury Requiring Surgery)
Our client was injured in a motor vehicle accident when an employer driving a company vehicle failed to yield the right of way and collided with the plaintiff's vehicle. The defendant's employer was sued for negligence soon thereafter. The defendants alleged that the company should not be held liable for the actions of the employee.
They claimed that the employee was not in the course and scope of his employment at the time of the accident. Through discovery, our attorneys learned that the defendants had a policy, both written and implied, whereby employees of the company were allowed to drive work vehicles after hours.
Furthermore, our attorneys argued case law that expanded the definition of course and scope which showed that the defendant was indeed "on the clock" when the accident occurred.
As a result, the defendants conceded liability and turned their defenses toward the alleged damages. They claimed that our client had a preexisting condition that was responsible for her current state.
We deposed the emergency room physician who assessed the client and recommended surgery regarding the medical necessity of the surgical procedure and the proximate cause of the plaintiff's condition. He testimony unequivocally defeated these arguments. The case was satisfactorily resolved through litigation.
Our client was injured in a motor vehicle accident when an employer driving a company vehicle failed to yield the right of way and collided with the plaintiff's vehicle. The defendant's employer was sued for negligence soon thereafter. The defendants alleged that the company should not be held liable for the actions of the employee.
They claimed that the employee was not in the course and scope of his employment at the time of the accident. Through discovery, our attorneys learned that the defendants had a policy, both written and implied, whereby employees of the company were allowed to drive work vehicles after hours.
Furthermore, our attorneys argued case law that expanded the definition of course and scope which showed that the defendant was indeed "on the clock" when the accident occurred.
As a result, the defendants conceded liability and turned their defenses toward the alleged damages. They claimed that our client had a preexisting condition that was responsible for her current state.
We deposed the emergency room physician who assessed the client and recommended surgery regarding the medical necessity of the surgical procedure and the proximate cause of the plaintiff's condition. He testimony unequivocally defeated these arguments. The case was satisfactorily resolved through litigation.
Total Recovery:
$210,000.00
$210,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$70,110.00
$70,110.00
Litigation Expenses:
$3,787.00
$3,787.00
$335,000.00 Recovery - Wrongful Death/ Commercial Vehicle Accident
The mother of a young man hired our firm to investigate the death of her son following a fatal car accident. The incident occurred as one of the two vehicles involved ran a red light and drive into the path of the other. The defendant was driving a work vehicle for a construction company. The defendant survived the accident and stated to police that the decedent caused the accident. The police could not conclusively determine who was at fault, yet the police report strongly implied that the decedent was likely at fault based on the statement provided by the defendant.
The plaintiff's mother was not convinced. Through a thorough investigation, we ultimately determined that the stoplight that the defendant claimed that our client ran, in fact, worked on a timer whereby the light was always green between certain hours unless a vehicle traveling on the intersecting road had been stopped at the right light for more than 30 seconds. Based on an analysis of the vehicles and tire markings, it was conclusively determined that both vehicles were traveling at the speed limit, which clearly indicates that the defendant driver had not accelerated from stop, rather, he was traveling at the speed limit, which would not have triggered a green light for the defendant.
The logical implications of this information is that the light could not have been red for the plaintiff, and it certainly would have been red for the defendant. As a consequence of this information, the case was resolved through litigation.
The mother of a young man hired our firm to investigate the death of her son following a fatal car accident. The incident occurred as one of the two vehicles involved ran a red light and drive into the path of the other. The defendant was driving a work vehicle for a construction company. The defendant survived the accident and stated to police that the decedent caused the accident. The police could not conclusively determine who was at fault, yet the police report strongly implied that the decedent was likely at fault based on the statement provided by the defendant.
The plaintiff's mother was not convinced. Through a thorough investigation, we ultimately determined that the stoplight that the defendant claimed that our client ran, in fact, worked on a timer whereby the light was always green between certain hours unless a vehicle traveling on the intersecting road had been stopped at the right light for more than 30 seconds. Based on an analysis of the vehicles and tire markings, it was conclusively determined that both vehicles were traveling at the speed limit, which clearly indicates that the defendant driver had not accelerated from stop, rather, he was traveling at the speed limit, which would not have triggered a green light for the defendant.
The logical implications of this information is that the light could not have been red for the plaintiff, and it certainly would have been red for the defendant. As a consequence of this information, the case was resolved through litigation.
Total Recovery:
$335,000.00
$335,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$134,000.00
$134,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$63,000.00
$63,000.00
$109,500.00 Recovery - Third-Party Dram Shop Accident (Broken Leg)
Recovery for passenger who suffered broken leg in a drunken driving accident.
Recovery for passenger who suffered broken leg in a drunken driving accident.
Total Recovery:
$109,500.00
$109,500.00
Attorney Fees:
$41,000.00
$41,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$30.00
$30.00
$100,000.00 Recovery - Automobile Accident (Soft-Tissue Injuries)
Recovery for client injured in an automobile accident.
Recovery for client injured in an automobile accident.
Total Recovery:
$100,000.00
$100,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$33,000.00
$33,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$500.00
$500.00
$100,000.00 Recovery - Motorcycle Accident (Broken Femur)
(policy limits) Recovery for victim who sustained a broken femur in a motorcycle accident.
(policy limits) Recovery for victim who sustained a broken femur in a motorcycle accident.
Total Recovery:
$100,000.00
$100,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$33,000.00
$33,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$0.00
$0.00
$100,000.00 Recovery - Automobile Accident (Soft-Tissue Injuries)
Recovery for client injured in a car accident in Dallas.
Recovery for client injured in a car accident in Dallas.
Total Recovery:
$100,000.00
$100,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$33,000.00
$33,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$100.00
$100.00
$350,000.00 Recovery - Commercial Vehicle Accident (Back Injury Requiring Surgery)
Our client, a middle-aged woman, was injured when an 18-wheeler rear-ended her vehicle. As a consequence of the wreck, she sustained a back injury which required surgery to remedy. Naturally, the defendants denied liability and argued that the accident was unavoidable. Our attorneys filed suit. The defendant driver initially claimed that our client suddenly changed lanes in front of his tractor-trailer and then inexplicably slammed onto her brakes. When confronted with eye-witness testimony and other physical evidence that reflected an entirely different scenario, the truck driver ultimately recanted. The case was successfully resolved through litigation.
Our client, a middle-aged woman, was injured when an 18-wheeler rear-ended her vehicle. As a consequence of the wreck, she sustained a back injury which required surgery to remedy. Naturally, the defendants denied liability and argued that the accident was unavoidable. Our attorneys filed suit. The defendant driver initially claimed that our client suddenly changed lanes in front of his tractor-trailer and then inexplicably slammed onto her brakes. When confronted with eye-witness testimony and other physical evidence that reflected an entirely different scenario, the truck driver ultimately recanted. The case was successfully resolved through litigation.
Total Recovery:
$350,000.00
$350,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$140,000.00
$140,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$8,188.00
$8,188.00
$550,000.00 Recovery - Wrongful Death / First Party Dram Shop
A young woman lost her life after a bar over served her to more than three times the legal limit resulting in her burning to death in a single-vehicle accident. Witnesses stated that she was so intoxicated that she could barely make it to her vehicle without assistance. Through litigation, our attorneys ascertained the necessary evidence to prove that the establishment provided alcohol to an obviously intoxicated person, thus resulting in her ultimate demise.
A young woman lost her life after a bar over served her to more than three times the legal limit resulting in her burning to death in a single-vehicle accident. Witnesses stated that she was so intoxicated that she could barely make it to her vehicle without assistance. Through litigation, our attorneys ascertained the necessary evidence to prove that the establishment provided alcohol to an obviously intoxicated person, thus resulting in her ultimate demise.
Total Recovery:
$550,000.00
$550,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$220,000.00
$220,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$25,000.00
$25,000.00
$350,000.00 Recovery - Wrongful Death / First Party Dram Shop
Our firm was hired by the minor child and parents of a young man who was killed in a motorcycle accident after being over served alcohol at a South Padre Island bar. The plaintiffs hired our firm to investigate the claim on the basis that the decedent was over the legal limit at the time of his death. In initial attempts to settle the case out of court, the defendants denied liability. Suit was filed soon thereafter.
The defendants initially argued that the decedent never consumed alcohol on their premises. Through physical evidence and deposition testimony to the contrary, we were able to conclusively prove that the decedent had indeed been drinking at the establishment.
The defendants then asserted allegations that the decedent's minor child was not actually his biological child, which would bar his claim entirely. A DNA test was performed and this argument was defeated.
The defendants then asserted the safe harbor defense. Our attorneys argued that the defendants did not qualify for safe harbor protection due to the fact that their servers were not all licensed providers. However, while this element was being addressed, our attorneys focused their attention on addressing the second element of the safe harbor defense regarding the bar's encouragement of the over service of alcohol. The defendants claimed that they would never serve the double-shot Bacardi cocktails that witnesses claimed the decedent drank several of. We sent private investigators into the bar to order the same drinks that the decedent consumed on the night of his death and the very same bar tenders who over served the decedent, without hesitation, served copious amounts of alcohol to the investigators, all of which was captured on hidden camera.
Once the safe harbor defense was defeated, the defendants argued that the decedent's BAC was low enough at the time of his death (as recorded by the hospital) that he would not have necessarily appeared obviously intoxicated to the servers and therefore the bar should not be held liable even if he had been over served. Eyewitness testimony refuted this.
Additionally, our firm's testifying medical expert reviewed the medical records related to the emergency helicopter flight that transported the decedent to the hospital after his accident. She determined that the EMS technicians administered numerous blood transfusions while in flight. Armed with this newfound data, our medical expert reverse extrapolated and determined conclusively that the decedent's BAC was actually in the range of .19-.21 at the time of the accident, though it was drastically diluted by the time he arrived at the hospital, which accounted for the relatively low BAC found in the hospital's medical records. This testimony proved to be pivotal in the case, resulting in a successful recovery for our clients.
Our firm was hired by the minor child and parents of a young man who was killed in a motorcycle accident after being over served alcohol at a South Padre Island bar. The plaintiffs hired our firm to investigate the claim on the basis that the decedent was over the legal limit at the time of his death. In initial attempts to settle the case out of court, the defendants denied liability. Suit was filed soon thereafter.
The defendants initially argued that the decedent never consumed alcohol on their premises. Through physical evidence and deposition testimony to the contrary, we were able to conclusively prove that the decedent had indeed been drinking at the establishment.
The defendants then asserted allegations that the decedent's minor child was not actually his biological child, which would bar his claim entirely. A DNA test was performed and this argument was defeated.
The defendants then asserted the safe harbor defense. Our attorneys argued that the defendants did not qualify for safe harbor protection due to the fact that their servers were not all licensed providers. However, while this element was being addressed, our attorneys focused their attention on addressing the second element of the safe harbor defense regarding the bar's encouragement of the over service of alcohol. The defendants claimed that they would never serve the double-shot Bacardi cocktails that witnesses claimed the decedent drank several of. We sent private investigators into the bar to order the same drinks that the decedent consumed on the night of his death and the very same bar tenders who over served the decedent, without hesitation, served copious amounts of alcohol to the investigators, all of which was captured on hidden camera.
Once the safe harbor defense was defeated, the defendants argued that the decedent's BAC was low enough at the time of his death (as recorded by the hospital) that he would not have necessarily appeared obviously intoxicated to the servers and therefore the bar should not be held liable even if he had been over served. Eyewitness testimony refuted this.
Additionally, our firm's testifying medical expert reviewed the medical records related to the emergency helicopter flight that transported the decedent to the hospital after his accident. She determined that the EMS technicians administered numerous blood transfusions while in flight. Armed with this newfound data, our medical expert reverse extrapolated and determined conclusively that the decedent's BAC was actually in the range of .19-.21 at the time of the accident, though it was drastically diluted by the time he arrived at the hospital, which accounted for the relatively low BAC found in the hospital's medical records. This testimony proved to be pivotal in the case, resulting in a successful recovery for our clients.
Total Recovery:
$350,000.00
$350,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$140,000.00
$140,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$40,000.00
$40,000.00
$200,000.00 Recovery - Commercial Vehicle Accident (Back Injury Requiring Surgery)
Recovery for motorcyclist who suffered a back injury in an 18-wheeler accident.
Recovery for motorcyclist who suffered a back injury in an 18-wheeler accident.
Total Recovery:
$200,000.00
$200,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$80,000.00
$80,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$5,709.00
$5,709.00