$114 millionVerdict

$114 Million Verdict Against USAA for Bad-Faith Handling of Rear-End Crash Claim

Verdict · Clark County District Court, Las Vegas, NV (Case No. A-20-821602-C) · 2025

Won by Bighorn Law.

A Clark County jury awarded Timothy Kuhn $114 million after USAA spent years stonewalling his claim from a 2018 rear-end collision it had originally conceded was not his fault.

What happened

In 2018, Timothy Kuhn was sitting in stopped traffic on Interstate 15 in Las Vegas when a Ford F-150 struck the rear of his BMW sedan at roughly 45 mph. USAA, his own insurer, promptly determined the other driver bore full responsibility for the crash.

Kuhn suffered a traumatic brain injury with lasting symptoms including memory loss, disrupted executive functioning, chronic headaches, and loss of smell. His treatment involved neurologists across the country and generated substantial medical bills. Despite its own liability finding, USAA opened negotiations at $10,000, a figure it maintained for years while the case moved toward trial.

The insurer's conduct grew more aggressive over time. USAA reversed its original position and argued in court filings that Kuhn had caused the collision himself. It retained expert witnesses to contest the severity of his brain injury, even as his medical record continued to build. Only as trial was about to begin did USAA agree to pay the $250,000 policy limit it had withheld for years.

Bighorn Law attorneys Kimball Jones, Joshua Berrett, and Emily Grable took the case to a Clark County jury on a bad-faith insurance theory. The trial team presented USAA's internal claims conduct alongside the medical evidence USAA's experts had disputed. Berrett noted after the verdict that the firm could not understand why USAA refused to resolve the matter earlier, 'other than them thinking that they could get by on their reputation.'

On January 31, 2025, the jury returned a verdict of $14 million in compensatory damages and $100 million in punitive damages, totaling $114 million. USAA stated it 'respectfully disagrees with the trial outcome' and was evaluating its legal options, including a potential appeal, as of the date of reporting. No ruling on any post-trial reduction had been issued at that time.

CVN editorially selected the verdict as the number-three most impressive plaintiff verdict of 2025 across the country.

Sources

This account is drawn from contemporaneous public reporting and the court record.