Our client was traveling northbound through a signalized intersection, proceeding lawfully on a green light with the right of way. A southbound driver turned into the same intersection and struck her head-on. The driver that hit our client turned on a yellow light, effectively yielding their right-of-way.
That driver was working. She was operating a commercial vehicle owned by a national corporate employer, with the employer’s permission and consent, while on a work-related mission. That transformed the case from a two-driver collision into a claim reaching a national corporation, its training and supervision practices, and its commercial insurance coverage.
The crash caused severe and disabling injuries to our client’s neck, shoulder, upper back, and extremities, along with significant emotional and psychological harm. The Townsley Law Firm recovered over $7,000,000 in a settlement from the driver and her corporate employer on behalf of our client.
The Injuries: A Treatment Picture That Kept Expanding
One of the defining features of this case is how far the medical picture extended beyond what a crash report would suggest. What follows is the documented course of care.
Cervical spine. Our client required MRI imaging of both the cervical and lumbar spine, and the cervical findings were significant enough to prompt a surgical consultation.
Left shoulder. The shoulder injury progressed to the point that she received a surgical recommendation.
Left wrist. This became one of the most demanding parts of her treatment. She required repeated nerve block injections, administered on a biweekly basis at a documented cost of roughly $1,000 per week, specifically so that she could tolerate physical therapy at all. Her treating provider noted that if physical therapy did not produce satisfactory results, additional surgery would likely be necessary.
Nerve testing. An upper extremity nerve conduction study, or EMG, was performed at an orthopedic facility to evaluate nerve function in her arm.
Spinal cord stimulator trial. A pain management specialist recommended a trial of a cervical spinal cord stimulator; an implanted device used for chronic pain that conventional treatment has not controlled. The projected cost of the procedure was approximately $50,000.
Mental health treatment. She required ongoing psychiatric care, including telepsychiatry sessions, reflecting the psychological toll of the collision.
Additional care. Her treatment also included chiropractic care, cervical trigger point injections and wrist blocks, physical therapy, and evaluations by specialists in neurosurgery, orthopedics, and anesthesiology and pain management.
Altogether, this is the profile of an injury that reshapes daily life. Weekly injections just to participate in therapy, a recommendation for an implanted pain device, two separate surgical recommendations, and psychiatric treatment, is what “severe and disabling” looks like in practice.
The damages claimed reflected that full scope: past and future medical, rehabilitation, and pharmacy expenses; past and future lost wages and loss of earning capacity; past and future physical pain and suffering, mental anguish, and loss of enjoyment of life; and scarring, disfigurement, and disability.
Why the Company Vehicle Changes Everything
When the at-fault driver is on the clock, the case takes a different shape. An ordinary collision typically involves one driver and one personal auto policy. A crash caused by an employee driving a company vehicle on company business can reach the driver, the corporate employer, and commercial coverage that is often far larger than any personal policy.
That is why establishing the employment relationship is an early priority. Here, the facts were clear: the vehicle was owned by a national corporate employer, the driver had permission and consent to operate it, and she was on a work-related mission when the crash occurred. Those facts are the bridge between the collision and the company.
Commercial vehicle cases also bring an additional layer of rules into play, governing driver qualification, training, and safe operation.
Liability Built from Multiple Directions
Rather than resting on a single theory, this case advanced several that reinforce one another.
Direct negligence against the driver. She failed to yield, made an improper turn without the right of way, failed to maintain a proper lookout, and operated her vehicle in a careless and dangerous manner. A yellow light does not confer the right to turn across oncoming traffic.
Vicarious liability against the employer. Under respondeat superior, an employer is responsible for an employee’s negligence committed within the course and scope of employment. Because this driver was working when the crash occurred, the company bore responsibility for her conduct.
Independent negligence by the employer. Separate from the driver’s actions, the employer faced claims for negligent training and supervision of the employee-driver and negligent entrustment of a commercial vehicle. These theories examine the company’s own decisions: who it allowed behind the wheel, how it trained her, and how it supervised her.
