small-logo
ProfessionalsCapabilitiesInsights & NewsCareersLocations
About UsAlumniOpportunity & InclusionPro BonoCorporate Social Responsibility
Stay Connected:
facebookinstagramlinkedintwitteryoutube
  1. WacoWatch

Blog

Why a Waco Jury’s $4 Million Award in Personal Injury Case Matters

  • PDFPDF
    • Email
    • LinkedIn
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    Share this page
  • PDFPDF
    • Email
    • LinkedIn
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    Share this page

Blog

Why a Waco Jury’s $4 Million Award in Personal Injury Case Matters

  • PDFPDF
    • Email
    • LinkedIn
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    Share this page

1 Min Read

Authors

Danielle WilliamsThomas M. Melsheimer

Related Locations

Charlotte
Chicago
Dallas
Houston
Los Angeles
San Francisco
Silicon Valley

Related Topics

Jury Trial

Related Capabilities

Intellectual Property
Patent Litigation

Related Regions

North America

October 30, 2020

Judge Albright presided over a personal injury jury trial this week. This case arose from the tipping-over of a 2,300-pound water tank system which nearly resulted in the amputation of the plaintiff’s foot. After a three-day trial (parties were limited to six hours of testimony) and 2.5 hours of deliberations (with three jury notes), the jury found in favor of the plaintiff and awarded $4 Million in damages. The 11-page verdict form (three pages longer than the verdict form in the MV3 v. Roku trial) included 12 separate damages elements, and the jury awarded damages for 10 of the 12 elements.

WacoWatch caught up with Tom Melsheimer to get his take on the award, and he observed, “This size verdict for a personal injury case that did not involve a death aligns Waco with what might be seen out of an East Texas jury. So, I think it is useful for evaluating potential damages in other kinds of cases as well.”

 

Related Professionals

Related Professionals

Danielle Williams

Thomas M. Melsheimer

Danielle Williams

Thomas M. Melsheimer

This entry has been created for information and planning purposes. It is not intended to be, nor should it be substituted for, legal advice, which turns on specific facts.

Logo
facebookinstagramlinkedintwitteryoutube

Copyright © 2025. Winston & Strawn LLP

AlumniCorporate Transparency Act Task ForceDEI Compliance Task ForceEqual Rights AmendmentLaw GlossaryThe Oval UpdateWinston MinutePrivacy PolicyCookie PolicyFraud & Scam AlertsNoticesSubscribeAttorney Advertising