How Born & McCaffrey Secured $380K in a High-Speed No-Seatbelt Crash Case
Two cars collided head-on—but their client wasn’t wearing his seatbelt. The client suffered a brain injury that, while serious, didn’t require extensive medical treatment, a scenario a seasoned brain injury lawyer knows juries often misunderstand.
Yet Michael Born and Peter McCaffrey of Born & McCaffrey Injury Law secured $380,000 from a jury. With host Keith Fuicelli, Michael and Peter reveal the plot twists in this unique case, starting at the hospital, when police initially considered that their client was at fault. The story changed when crash data revealed the defendant’s excessive speed. Michael and Peter discuss how they balanced the role that speed played against their client’s lack of a seatbelt. They also share how they delicately cross-examined the defendant so that the jury would not feel sympathy for him.
This case is an example of how even when injuries aren’t catastrophic or clearly documented through extensive treatment, experienced trial attorneys can secure justice. Whether the case involves disputed liability or low medical expenses, strategy matters — as does selecting the right personal injury attorney.
Why No-Seatbelt Cases Are Especially Hard to Win
Jurors often come into trial with strong opinions about seatbelt use. Even when a defendant clearly caused a crash, the absence of a seatbelt can subconsciously shift blame to the injured person. Car accident attorneys rely on this bias, arguing that the plaintiff’s injuries were self-inflicted or exaggerated.
In this case, Born & McCaffrey had to overcome a common juror assumption: “If you didn’t wear a seatbelt, you caused your own injuries.” The defense leaned heavily on this narrative, despite evidence that the defendant’s excessive speed created forces severe enough to cause injury regardless of restraint use.
Winning required reframing the discussion away from personal choice and toward physics, responsibility, and foreseeability—core principles of personal injury law.
How Crash Data Changed the Narrative
Modern vehicles record detailed crash data, including speed, braking, and impact forces. In this case, electronic crash data became a turning point.
Once analyzed, the data showed:
- The defendant was traveling at a dangerously excessive speed
- The force of the collision exceeded what the roadway conditions allowed
- The crash severity would have posed a serious risk even to a restrained driver
By grounding the case in objective data rather than emotion, the attorneys were able to show that speed—not seatbelt use—was the primary cause of harm.
This evidence helped the jury focus on accountability instead of hindsight judgment.
Listen to the Podcast here: https://thectlc.com/episode/michael-born-and-peter-mccaffrey-finding-fault-in-a-high-speed-no-seatbelt-case.
FAQs About No-Seatbelt Injury Cases
Can you recover damages if you weren’t wearing a seatbelt?
Yes. While seatbelt use may affect damages in some states, it does not eliminate the defendant’s responsibility for causing the crash.
Do juries automatically blame injured drivers without seatbelts?
No, but bias exists. Skilled trial lawyers address this head-on by reframing the issue around causation and responsibility.
Are brain injuries valid claims without MRIs or surgery?
Yes. Many brain injuries are diagnosed clinically and through symptom presentation, not imaging alone.
How does comparative negligence affect verdicts?
Jurors may assign partial responsibility to the injured party, but they can still award substantial damages if the defendant’s conduct was egregious.
Don’t Let Bias Decide the Value of Your Case
Insurance companies love no-seatbelt cases. They assume jurors will blame the injured person—and they use that assumption to minimize or deny fair compensation.
That strategy only works when trial lawyers let it.
At Born & McCaffrey Injury Law, we know that negligence, speed, and physics—not hindsight judgment—determine responsibility after an accident. This case proves that even when injuries aren’t catastrophic and medical treatment is limited, a disciplined trial strategy and command of evidence can overcome bias and secure justice.
If you’ve been told your case is “too hard,” “too risky,” or “not worth much,” get a second opinion. We’re ready to analyze the crash data, challenge unfair assumptions, and fight for the outcome your case truly deserves.
Call Born & McCaffrey Injury Law today and take the first step toward accountability.
