On August 24, 2017, in front of Judge Mike Wallick in the 348th District Court, Tarrant County, Texas, attorneys Richard Harrison and Matthew Mumm argued for their client Emily Saffer. After a trial, it took the jury a short time to dispense with the over $75k demand and awarded just $13,271 for past medical bills.


On June 14, 2013, Plaintiff McMahon was driving his 2001 Toyota Solara on Highway 26 in North Richland Hills. Traffic ahead came to a stop, and he was impacted from the rear by Defendant Emily Saffer. After the impact, McMahon claimed multiple injuries. Prior to trial, Saffer stipulated to liability.


McMahon was taken by ambulance to the emergency room. He claimed a head contusion, cervical injury, thoracic and lumbar strains and sprains, and left shoulder and knee pain. Significantly, he also claimed that he had had no prior neck or back pain. After all that, the ER doctors said he had “no serious injury.” His scans were clean except for degenerative disc images and a prior knee surgery.

Nevertheless, Plaintiff went to physical therapy 37 times, where his exercises consisted of stretching, using a balance board, and riding an exercise bike. After seeing multiple doctors at multiple clinics, McMahon ended up at a pain management clinic in August of that year. There, an orthopedic surgeon testified that he should have a rhizotomy at a cost of $15,000 – $20,000 and that it would probably have to be repeated in the future.

Prior to trial in March of 2015, McMahon was in yet another accident, this one much more serious. Despite being hospitalized three times, and even having a pain pump implanted in his body, Plaintiff claimed that his ongoing problems were caused by the instant accident in 2013!

At trial, the Richard Harrison and Matt Mumm showed that the Defendant was not credible, motivated by financial gain, and was not of good character. In addition, they pointed to multiple discrepancies between the injury and hospital records and Plaintiff’s testimony.

When photos of the accident scene were let into evidence, Harrison & Hull attorneys simply asked the jury to use their common sense.

Ultimately, that is what happened, and Plaintiff took home just 17% of what he asked the jury to award. Another big win for Harrison & Hull.