Motorcycle Accident Law under Personal Injury
Motorcycle Accident Law under Personal Injury
Overview
Motorcycle accident law falls under the broader category of personal injury law, which deals with legal disputes arising when one person’s negligence or intentional act causes harm to another. In motorcycle accidents, the injured party (usually the motorcyclist) seeks compensation for injuries sustained due to another party’s fault.
Key Legal Concepts
Duty of Care
Every road user owes a duty of care to others. This means motorcyclists, drivers, and pedestrians must act reasonably to avoid causing harm.
Breach of Duty
If a party fails to meet this standard of care—such as by running a red light, speeding, or distracted driving—they breach their duty.
Causation
The breach must directly cause the accident and resulting injuries. This is called causation.
Damages
The injured motorcyclist must show actual damages—medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, etc.
Comparative or Contributory Negligence
Sometimes the motorcyclist may share some fault, which can reduce or bar recovery depending on the rule applied.
Specific Issues in Motorcycle Accident Cases
Visibility and Vulnerability:
Motorcycles are smaller and less visible than cars, which often leads to other drivers failing to yield or cutting motorcycles off. This factor is frequently relevant in determining negligence.
Helmet and Safety Gear:
Whether the motorcyclist was wearing a helmet or protective gear can influence damages or liability.
Lane Splitting:
In some cases, motorcyclists filtering between lanes can be a point of contention regarding fault.
Illustrative Case Law Examples
Case 1: Smith v. Jones
Facts: A motorcyclist was struck by a car that failed to stop at a stop sign. The motorcyclist suffered serious injuries.
Holding: The court held that the driver breached the duty of care by ignoring the stop sign, directly causing the accident. The motorcyclist was awarded damages for medical expenses and pain and suffering.
Legal Principle: Failing to obey traffic control devices constitutes a breach of duty resulting in liability.
Case 2: Brown v. Davis
Facts: The motorcyclist was filtering between cars in slow traffic when a car changed lanes without signaling, colliding with the motorcyclist. The driver claimed the motorcyclist was negligent for lane splitting.
Holding: The court found both parties partially at fault but held the driver primarily liable since the duty to check blind spots and signal changes was clear. The motorcyclist’s damages were reduced by their percentage of fault.
Legal Principle: Comparative negligence applies where both parties contribute to the accident; drivers have a heightened duty to watch for motorcyclists.
Case 3: Johnson v. State
Facts: A motorcyclist not wearing a helmet suffered severe head injuries in a collision caused by a negligent driver. The driver argued damages should be reduced due to failure to wear protective gear.
Holding: The court reduced the damages awarded, citing that the motorcyclist’s failure to wear a helmet contributed to the extent of injuries but did not absolve the driver of liability.
Legal Principle: Failure to mitigate damages (like wearing helmets) can reduce compensation but not eliminate liability.
RELATED Blog
0 comments