At Witherite Law Group, we know that truth lives in the details. When a case involves complex medical history, technical vehicle data, and high-stakes testimony, our teams rise to the challenge; bringing clarity, confidence, and compassion to the courtroom. This trial is a testament to the power of preparation and precision.

This case centered around a collision involving a DISD vehicle, with layers of complexity including prior medical treatment, vehicle dynamics, and expert testimony. Our team built a compelling narrative that focused on facts, not assumptions—leading to a verdict that far exceeded expectations.

Key Challenges

  • The client had a prior crash involving a DISD vehicle just four months earlier.
  • She had received treatment and MRIs shortly before the second crash.
  • Chiropractic records indicated ongoing pain at the time of the incident.
  • Post-crash MRIs showed disc conditions that appeared healthier than earlier scans.

Strategic Wins

  • Vehicle download confirmed the client was traveling at only 20mph.
  • Judd Joy’s inspection validated consistent speed between 16–20mph in the final seconds before impact.
  • The investigating officer’s relationship to the defendant raised questions of impartiality.
  • Opposing counsel lacked treatment records from the prior crash.
  • Strong PD photos helped reinforce the client’s position visually.

Trial Execution

Tony led the case with precision, handling voir dire, opening, closing, and key witness examinations including the client, her daughter, and the investigating officer. Rabia’s examination of Hothem helped the jury understand the difference between new injuries and aggravation of prior conditions.

Luna Szanto and Jessica Trevino were instrumental in supporting both trial logistics and client care, forming a strong connection with Stephanie that helped her stay calm and focused. Josh Alexander’s focus group work the week prior helped refine the team’s approach.

Jury Engagement

In a rare moment, a juror asked to submit questions to witnesses—Judge Tillery allowed it. The questions focused on airbag deployment and crash force thresholds. During deliberations, the jury requested Tony’s presentation slides to revisit the numbers. Judge Tillery reminded them they had all the evidence. The jury returned with a verdict more than double what was asked.

This case reflects the heart of our firm: people first, unmtached expertise, and integrity always.