$21.3 Million Verdict in Rear-End Crash Trial Beats $50K Settlement Offer

A Los Angeles County jury returned a $21.3 million verdict against FBM Group Corporation and its driver, Leilei Chen, for a 2017 rear-end collision that allegedly left two young women with lasting traumatic brain injuries. Plaintiffs Asia and Sarah Morgan were passengers in a van that was struck by an 18-wheeler operated by Chen, who reportedly became distracted after dropping a water bottle.

Although the plaintiffs initially appeared uninjured after being treated at a local hospital, their attorneys presented evidence that neurological symptoms developed in the months following the crash. Sarah reportedly experienced cognitive issues and balance difficulties, while Asia suffered from incontinence and sensitivity issues—symptoms consistent with traumatic brain injury.

Plaintiffs’ counsel emphasized the role of advanced imaging, including MR Neurography and DTI scans, in demonstrating the extent of the injuries. “This case shows the utility of advanced imaging techniques… it gives a whole new dimension to brain injuries,” said attorney Stephen Morrison of Bowen Painter.

Disputed Liability and the Role of Reconstruction Experts

At trial, the defense argued that the van’s driver was at fault for driving well below the posted speed limit, suggesting that the plaintiffs’ vehicle created a hazard. The jury, however, found FBM Group 82% liable and the van’s driver 18% liable. That apportionment reduced the final collectible award to approximately $17 million.

Due to the absence of dash cam footage, which was less common in commercial trucks at the time, both parties leaned heavily on forensic accident reconstruction experts. Testimony centered on competing interpretations of the seconds leading up to the impact.

Defense counsel disputed whether the impact caused the van’s seat backs to fail, an issue central to the plaintiffs' theory that their injuries were caused by abrupt backward motion. Despite these disputes, the jury ultimately sided with the plaintiffs’ expert interpretations.

Settlement Offers Rejected Ahead of Trial

Prior to trial, the defense made a $50,000 settlement offer—an amount significantly below the final verdict. According to Morrison, the plaintiffs later demanded $2 million in 2019, and increased that demand to $7 million in March 2025. During jury deliberations, the defense reportedly offered $750,000, which was rejected.

“Our lawyers are national trial lawyers and really leaned into ‘parachute trial counsel’ opportunities when the courts closed down during the pandemic,” Morrison told Courtroom View Network. He noted that his Georgia-based firm became involved through prior connections in California, with partner Paul Painter previously stationed in San Diego as a naval officer.

Trial Strategy and Expert Testimony

The trial spanned several weeks, beginning June 22. It featured extensive expert testimony on medical diagnosis, biomechanics, and crash dynamics. Morrison credited his team’s preparation and case strategy for the favorable verdict, particularly their use of medical imaging to establish the physical basis of the plaintiffs’ injuries.

He also acknowledged the contribution of his firm’s support staff: “This case was a lot of work but we could not be prouder to represent the Morgans and for our small but mighty firm to try a case all the way across the country—and win.”

Law Firms Involved

The plaintiffs were represented by Bowen Painter, in partnership with Wisner Baum. McGlinchey Stafford PLC served as defense counsel.

Case Caption and Judge

The case, Pope-Morgan, et al. v. Chen, et al., was heard before Judge J. Stephen Czuleger in Los Angeles County Superior Court, case number 19STCV16639.