$50,000 Policy Limits Settlement After Allen Rear End Crash

The Result

Our client recovered the full $50,000 third party bodily injury policy limit after she was rear ended while stopped in traffic on northbound U.S. 75 in Allen, Texas.

The case resolved before a lawsuit was filed. Although the client did not begin pain management treatment until September 4, 2024, the legal team developed the evidence necessary to establish clear liability, document her injuries and treatment, and secure the full available third party policy limit.

The Rear End Crash

The collision occurred on Thursday, August 15, 2024, at approximately 6:03 p.m., in Allen, Collin County, Texas.

The crash occurred on northbound U.S. Highway 75.

1. Our client was driving an SUV in northbound traffic.
2. Traffic had stopped.
3. Our client's vehicle was stopped in the roadway when the driver of a sedan traveling behind her failed to control speed and rear ended her.
4. The impact came from directly behind.
5. The collision involved two vehicles.

The available crash report information identifies the following driver's failure to control speed as the cause of the rear end collision.

The report did not identify a contributing action by our client.

Vehicle Damage and Collision Force

This was not a minor parking lot impact.

The crash caused visible damage to both vehicles.

Injuries

However, the fact that a person does not leave by ambulance or go directly to an emergency room does not mean the collision caused no injury.

After the crash, the client developed symptoms consistent with whiplash and lower body injury.

The low back and tailbone pain became more noticeable and worsened in the days after the collision.

Treatment Gap and Pain Management

The client did not begin formal pain management treatment immediately after the August 15 crash.

She began treatment with a pain management provider on September 4, 2024.

The existence of a treatment gap did not change the core liability evidence: she was stopped in traffic when another driver failed to control speed and rear ended her.

It also did not prevent the legal team from building a complete damages claim.

Chiropractic Care and Continued Treatment

The client continued with chiropractic care from late September through mid November 2024.

She attended approximately 20 chiropractic visits.

Treatment included:

• Electrical stimulation.
• Mechanical traction.
• Spinal adjustments.
• Massage.
• Therapeutic exercise.

Her chiropractic diagnoses included lumbar sprain, myalgia, and sleep disorder.

1. Initial chiropractic examinationAt the initial chiropractic examination, her lumbar range of motion was moderately restricted.
2. Mid treatment reevaluationAt a mid treatment reevaluation, her progress was described as slower than expected.
3. November reevaluationBy the November reevaluation, her progress was described as improving as expected. Her pain was intermittent, and she did not report numbness, sleep problems, or medication use at that visit.

MRI Findings

A lumbar MRI performed on September 12, 2024, documented findings at L4-5 and L5-S1.

The records describe certain findings (including bone spurs, loss of disc height and hydration, and endplate changes) as degenerative. The client's medical providers nevertheless evaluated the MRI in connection with her post crash low back symptoms and treated her for lumbar disc herniation and radiculopathy.

Spinal Injection

Conservative treatment alone did not immediately resolve the client's symptoms.

As treatment continued, the client elected to proceed with an interventional spinal procedure.

Treatment and Medical Documentation

After the rear end collision, the client's low back and tailbone pain continued and required a structured course of care. She began with pain management treatment, underwent diagnostic imaging, completed chiropractic care, and later proceeded with an interventional spinal procedure after conservative treatment did not immediately resolve her symptoms.

Her records documented evaluation for lumbar sprain and strain, muscle spasm, radiating symptoms, and lumbar disc related findings. The treatment plan included medication, MRI imaging, chiropractic care, follow up appointments, and a spinal injection. After the injection, the client reported substantial improvement. At her final pain management visit, she reported no low back pain and was discharged from pain management.

Overcoming the Treatment Gap

Insurance companies often attempt to use any delay between a crash and the first formal medical appointment to minimize an injured person's claim.

In this case, the client did not start pain management care until September 4, 2024, after the August 15 collision.

The attorney did not allow that delay to define the value of the case.

Instead, the legal team focused on the complete evidence:

1. 01The client was stopped in northbound U.S. 75 traffic when the following driver failed to control speed.
2. 02The collision caused clear rear end damage to the client's SUV and substantial front end damage to the striking sedan.
3. 03The client developed lower back and tailbone pain after the crash.
4. 04Her pain management examination documented an 8 out of 10 pain level, spasm, tenderness, and radiating symptoms.
5. 05Her providers ordered an MRI and diagnosed lumbar sprain/strain, muscle spasm, lumbar radiculopathy, and later lumbar disc herniation.
6. 06She completed approximately 20 chiropractic visits.
7. 07She required prescription medication and an interventional spinal injection.
8. 08The injection provided significant relief, but only after the client underwent continued evaluation and treatment.

By presenting the full timeline, not simply the date of the first appointment, the legal team established the seriousness of the claim and supported a policy limits recovery.

Policy Limits Result

The claim was resolved before litigation became necessary.

The legal team obtained the full available $50,000 third party bodily injury policy limit.

This case shows why a treatment gap should not automatically define the outcome of an injury claim. When liability is clear, damage evidence is preserved, medical records support the injury progression, and treatment is properly documented, it is still possible to obtain the full available recovery.

Direct Case Experience

This case summary is based on evidence developed during the firm's representation of the client.

That evidence included the official Texas crash report, vehicle damage photographs, medical records, chiropractic records, pain management records, lumbar MRI findings, procedure documentation, billing records, and settlement documentation.

The case was developed as a complete rear end collision claim, from the stopped traffic impact on northbound U.S. 75 through the client's lower back and tailbone symptoms, treatment gap, chiropractic care, MRI findings, spinal injection, and prelitigation policy limits settlement.

Attorney Review

Reviewed by: Josh Alexander, Founder and Managing Attorney

Published: September 24, 2026
Last reviewed: September 24, 2026

Case Result Disclaimer