Bike Accident Victims Have Legal Options

Bicycle Accident Lawyer

If you have recently been injured in a bicycle accident, it is important to understand that you may have opportunities for legal and financial recourse available to you at this time. All too often, victims of bicycle accidents are surprised to discover that many people assume that they must have been to blame for their injurious circumstances. The car-centric culture in the U.S. is such that when cyclists, bikers, recreational bike riders, and scooter operators are injured as a result of accidents, many people jump to the conclusion that any non-motorist involved in the crash in question must be at fault for any harm caused.

This negative presumption keeps many injury victims from seeking legal guidance in the wake of a crash because they assume that they won’t be able to obtain justice for what happened to them. Thankfully, although some people jump to unfounded conclusions in the wake of a motorist/non-motorist crash, the law does not. If an accident injury victim’s case meets specific criteria, they should receive any and all compensation that is rightfully theirs.

Filing a Personal Injury Lawsuit

As an experienced bicycle accident lawyer – including those who practice at The Cohen Injury Law Group, P.C. – can explain in greater detail, injury victims who file personal injury lawsuits must generally prove three legal standards have been met in their case before they can be awarded compensation.

First, it must be proven that any defendant (such as a motorist or a manufacturer of defective auto parts) owed the injury victim/plaintiff a duty of care under the law. As anyone traveling on roads in the U.S. has a duty to operate their mode of transportation safely in order to mitigate the risk of harm to themselves and others, this standard isn’t generally a difficult one to meet in bicycle accident cases.

Second, it must be proven that any defendant named in a case behaved in a manner that was reckless, negligent, or intentionally dangerous. There are some exceptions to this rule for products defect cases tried under a legal theory of strict liability. However, this is generally the standard that must be met.

Third, it must be proven that the negligent, reckless, or intentionally dangerous conduct of the defendant directly contributed to the cause(s) of the plaintiff’s physical harm. For example, a motorist’s decision to drive after drinking to excess directly contributed to the cause of the accident that caused a cyclist’s injuries.

It is vital to understand that, unless you live in a very small minority of states, you remain entitled to compensation as a result of your injuries – provided that all of these legal criteria are met – even if you were partially to blame for what happened to you. Some states limit this opportunity to victims of accidents who are less than 50% at fault for their own harm. But, states like California, Florida, and Arizona do not place such restrictions on a victim’s right to sue others whose actions directly contributed to their harm.