Midlothian, TX — September 20, 2025, one person was injured in a car accident at about 2:10 a.m. on U.S. Route 287 near Newton Branch Road.

A preliminary accident report indicates that a 2016 Kia Sedona crashed into a 2018 Kia Soul that had been disabled in the road.

The driver of the Soul, a 39-year-old man, was seriously injured in the crash, according to the report. His name has not been made public yet.

The other driver was not hurt, the report states.

Authorities have not released any additional information about the Ellis County crash at this time.

Commentary by Attorney Michael Grossman

After a serious crash, it’s natural to focus on what’s most visible: the wreckage, the injuries, the disruption. But what often shapes the outcome of a crash investigation isn’t what’s lying in the road. It’s what gets missed after the dust settles.

A late-night crash involving a disabled vehicle raises complicated questions about what each driver saw and did in the moments before impact. Did investigators map the scene with precision tools? Did they reconstruct each vehicle's path to understand how visibility, reaction time and speed factored into the collision? At 2 a.m., lighting and fatigue can distort what happened, which makes it even more crucial that officers thoroughly document driver behavior leading up to the crash. Unfortunately, in many cases, reports are based only on basic measurements and interviews, leaving out the deeper analysis that complex crashes require.

The presence of a disabled car in the roadway immediately raises the question: why was it there? Breakdowns can stem from worn parts, sudden mechanical failures or software issues. Was the Soul examined for signs of engine failure, battery problems or electrical malfunctions? If no one dug into whether a defect played a role, then a major piece of the puzzle could be missing. And on the other end, the striking vehicle should be reviewed too: did its systems respond properly, or was there a lapse in braking or detection?

Modern vehicles often carry black box-like systems that track speed, braking and throttle use. If either car had a telematics system or paired mobile devices, those could show when the drivers recognized danger and what steps they took, or didn’t take. Without that kind of data, conclusions about responsibility may lean too heavily on assumptions. A full picture requires more than physical evidence; it demands digital insight as well.

When crashes happen in the early hours and leave behind more questions than answers, it’s critical not to rush the narrative. Sometimes, what isn’t immediately obvious turns out to matter most.

Key Takeaways:

• It's unclear if crash investigators went beyond the basics to reconstruct what happened.
• A mechanical issue may have caused the disabled vehicle to stall. Was that ruled out?
• Key data from vehicle systems or phones could clarify what drivers did before the crash.