$38.23M At Trial for Driver After Rear-End Crash 

Horton & Mendez Secure $38.23 Million at Trial for Driver Suffering Partial Paralysis After Rear-End Crash 

Case Type: Personal Injury (Negligent design and maintenance of roadway; automobile negligence) 

Attorney for Plaintiff: Devlin K. Horton of Horton & Mendez (Wilmington, N.C.) 

Case Name: Harris v. Glynn, North Carolina Department of Transportation 

Verdict: $38,239,292 for Plaintiff  

Date of Incident: Sept. 19, 2021 

Date of Resolution: June 28, 2024 

On Sept. 19, 2021, at approximately 9 a.m. in Greenville, N.C., Plaintiff brought her car to a stop to allow a pedestrian to cross at a crosswalk situated mid-block on the street. The crosswalk was only denoted by painted markings and a “pedestrian here” sign. Despite their commonality in other parts of the state, no flashing lights were installed on the site, although Defendant NC Department of Transportation maintained authority to do so at all times relevant to the matter.   

Defendant Driver admitted in her testimony that she was checking her mirrors and blind spot before the crash. Defendant Driver was traveling at such a speed that the pedestrian for whom Plaintiff had yielded saw Defendant Driver approaching and refrained from crossing as it was apparent that Defendant Driver was about to crash into Plaintiff’s car. 

Plaintiff’s allegations centered on the assertion that the crosswalk should not have been placed at mid-block on the street and that since it was placed in such a manner, it should have utilized enhanced safety features.  

These allegations were bolstered by Matt Sams, a standard of care expert, who testified that Defendant D.O.T. violated the standard of care it owed to the public in its placement and configuration of the crosswalk. Sams also testified that the crosswalk should have had additional safety features to alert drivers to the presence of pedestrians and other stopped cars.  

Additionally, human factors expert Mike Maddox testified that had there been flashing lights present, the lights would have been within Defendant driver’s central and peripheral field of vision as her eyes moved to check the mirrors and her blind spot as she claimed to have done. The lights would have caught her attention and caused her to reduce speed and avoid the crash altogether.  

Defendant D.O.T. countered with an argument that it had met the standards established by the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices’ requirements for the crosswalk and that Defendant Driver was the sole cause of Plaintiff’s injuries.  

The insurer in the matter was USAA. The highest settlement offer from the Defense was $350,000 and the lowest offer from the Plaintiffs was $1,000,000. The case was tried before the Honorable Judge Jeffrey B. Foster in Pitt County Superior Court.