San Francisco Bicycle Accident Lawyer

Whether you are injured in San Francisco or any other community in California, your rights when injured in a bicycle accident are the same as any other citizen who suffers an injury through the fault of someone else. If you're injured by the negligent or careless acts of a private party or government entity to maintain a street, highway, driveway, or bike path, or if you're injured because there was a failure in the design or some component of your bicycle, or you were injured because of the neglgent vehicle operation of someone driving a car, motorcycle or other bicycle, then you have the right to bring a legal action against the person, business or government entity responsible for your harm.

Different statutes of limitations (time limits) may be in play, depending on who you claim is responsible for your injury. Generally, for adults, the statute of limitations is two years from the date of injury, within which time you must file a lawsuit or your legal rights are lost. If a government entity—such as a county, city, state, agency, or commission—is responsible for your injury, you must first comply with specific California claim statutes before filing a lawsuit.

The time within which to file such claims is generally 180 days from the date of the accident or injury. Because California State injury compensation law is fault-based, you must prove legal fault on the part of someone to make them responsible for injuries you have suffered. Your legal rights after a bicycle accident will therefore be dependent upon proving that another person, business, or government entity is responsible because of their actions, or their failure to take action, which resulted in injury to you. Analyzing fault-based culpable conduct in California often requires the assistance of attorneys who specialize in injury claims and who have prior experience in dealing with the circumstances of the facts and circumstances surrounding your injury.

Liability (also known as legal fault) for injuries arising out of bicycle collisions or accidents in California is determined based on whether the person alleged to be responsible was careless or negligent in their behavior. Carelessness and negligence are legal terms that refer to the failure to behave reasonably, thereby avoiding injury to oneself or others. Reasonable conduct is determined on a case-by-case basis. Reasonableness is a subjective standard; when cases proceed to trial, jurors are asked to determine whether the person who caused harm acted reasonably under the circumstances. This assessment, whether in a trial or during settlement negotiations, is
based on the hypothetical reasonable person standard. Everyone in California, whether an individual, business, or public entity, must act to avoid injury to others. Sometimes reasonableness depends on whether a statute has been violated. Other times, reasonableness is determined based on expert testimony. Still other times, reasonableness is determined by common and acceptable behavior in the community. Lawyers with experience in the fields of civil liability, personal injury, and bicycle related collisions are familiar with the general rules regarding safe bicycle operation. An experienced and skilled bicycle-injury attorney is often required to obtain full and fair compensation and to prove legal fault. Just like automobile drivers, bicycle riders have an obligation to be alert to their surroundings and to ride in a manner that does not put either themselves or others at risk. When bicycle riders are injured due to pavement defects or unsafe roadways, the question becomes whether the person responsible for owning and maintaining the roadway acted reasonably. When bicycle riders are injured in collisions with cars, motorcycles, or other bicyclists, the test is whether anyone involved was unreasonable in the operation of their vehicle. Under the California Vehicle Code, bicycles are considered vehicles, and bicycle riders must act in a manner that complies with the requirements of the California Vehicle Code.

After any crash or collision involving a bicycle rider, the most important thing for the rider to do is to determine if emergent medical care is necessary. If an injured rider needs an ambulance, an EMT, an emergency room visit, or urgent care, and they are experiencing symptoms that suggest they are in danger of major complications, they
need to seek immediate medical attention. Suppose the victim is stable from an injury perspective. In that case, the most important thing to do following a collision is to collect all available evidence before it is changed or removed. It is also important to obtain the identities of all other persons involved and to document the physical surroundings where the injury occurred, including other vehicles and the scene as it exists post–accident.

Using their mobile phones, injured cyclists should photograph the area, roadway, terrain, and condition of any vehicles involved. Photographs of physical evidence, including tire marks, skid marks, vehicle debris, and damage to the involved vehicles, as well as documentation of the paths of travel of the involved vehicles, will all be critical at some point if there is a dispute over who is at fault. Physical evidence is often necessary for conducting a thorough accident reconstruction using skilled engineers. After documenting all aspects of the scene and surroundings, injured riders should engage with people at the scene who witnessed the incident, obtaining their contact information—such as phone numbers or email addresses — so that follow-up can take place later.

If first responders are at the scene, injured riders should always cooperate by truthfully relating to investigators what they recall having occurred. Finally, injured riders should make an assessment as to whether or not the event in which they were injured may have been recorded by video cameras in local homes or businesses or connected to traffic control devices operated by public entities so that if there is reliable video evidence of what occurred, the victim will know to relay that information to the lawyer they retain. Video should be recovered, retrieved, and saved. Prompt investigation is critical because business security video and public entity traffic camera video may only be retained for as little as 30 days or less.

Where fault for physical injuries resides with another person, a business, or a government entity, then injured cyclists are entitled to claim both non-economic and economic damages. Economic damages are losses in the amount of dollars lost in the past or dollars lost in the future. Compensation requires proof of expenditures that have been made or will be made in the future for expenses such as medical bills, transportation, attendant care, pharmacy costs, lost wages, job opportunities, rehabilitation, job training, and other economic losses resulting from a physical or emotional injury. Injured cyclists who can prove that another person, business, or
government entity was at fault for their injuries may also recover non-economic damages. Non-economic damages are compensation for various losses, including physical pain, disability, inconvenience, stress, anxiety, fear, disfigurement, loss of life's enjoyment, loss of relationships, and other non-monetary losses that result directly from a physical injury or the disability it causes. The amount of non-economic damages is not set by law, but in cases that ultimately go to a jury, the amount jurors who hear the evidence believe is full, fair and complete. Non-economic damages must be supported by proof of a physical or emotional injury. Proof of injuries requires medical records and the testimony of physicians and other experts, including professionals in the areas of rehabilitation, physical therapy, occupational therapy, orthopedics, neurology, physical medicine and life care planning.

When a cyclist is injured, the fault for their injury is determined according to the state's laws. In California, the state law, which is used as a tool for determining whether or not payment should be made, is the law of negligence. Negligence simply means the failure to use reasonable care to avoid injury to others or to oneself. In determining whether someone was negligent in causing an injury, a judge or jury typically examines whether the person accused of causing the injury acted reasonably or unreasonably in operating their vehicle or managing their property. In Collisions between bicycles and automobiles or trucks, the focus is usually on whether or not the person alleged to be at fault was using all of the skill required of a reasonable driver to make certain that injury to others was avoided.

The monetary damages that can be recovered in a bicycle accident are exactly the same damages that are recoverable if someone is hit by a car, or falls because of a
defect in a street or sidewalk, or is injured because of the failure of a product to perform correctly. Civil law provides the right to seek both economic and non-economic losses when any Californian is injured through the fault of someone else. As we have discussed in other questions, the kinds of damages that the law authorizes are divided into two types: economic losses and non-economic losses. Economic losses are things for which the injured person has had to pay money, use their credit, or use their insurance. Typically, economic damages include the cost of medical care, medications, therapies, or rehabilitation, as well as lost wages, job opportunities, pensions, and other types of monetary support. Non-economic damages are things that people cannot put a monetary value on. Conditions such as pain, suffering, disability, and limitations on the ability to move, think, or perform activities of daily living. Non-economic damages also include fear, anxiety, and worry over what has happened and/or what will happen in the future. Scarring, disfigurement, inability to walk or drive, loss of the use of an arm or leg, as well as loss of strength or endurance, are all components of non-economic harm for which a monetary award is authorized.

For adults injured while riding their bicycles by individuals or businesses, the statute of limitations in California for filing a court action is 2 years from the date of injury. When the wrongdoer is a public or government entity, special, shorter-time rules apply, and consultation with a lawyer is crucial. Before a lawsuit can be filed against public entities, such as towns, cities, boards, or commissions, a government claim must be filed with the entity in accordance with the terms of the California Government Code. Preparing and filing government codes is a complex and nuanced process, and clients almost always benefit from having an attorney assist them.

The time limits are as short as 180 days from the date of injury for claims against government entities, towns, cities, the state, boards, or districts. The time limits for bringing an action on behalf of someone under the age of 18 are different than the time limits that apply to adults. Where someone under pain is injured, and the wrongdoer is not a governmental entity, the time within which to file a civil action in Superior Court is 2 years from the date on which the injured person turns 18. Statutes of limitation in injury cases are complicated. This is not an area where amateurs should tread. If you are badly injured and you are intent on filing an action, consultation with a competent lawyer who is familiar with all of the statutes of limitation that operate in the personal injury area is highly recommended.

California is a comparative fault state. This means that in any case where someone is injured, a judge or jury hearing the evidence considers whether one or more persons are responsible for the occurrence of the injury. Sometimes two or more people are responsible. When an injured person is partly responsible for their own injury, the percentage of fault attributable to them reduces the overall damages paid. Assume, for instance, that someone was in a bicycle accident and had a case with a value of $5,000. The accident happened at an intersection. There was a dispute about who had the right of way. One witness stated that the bicyclist didn't stop and was therefore responsible for the accident. Another witness said that the car didn't stop, which caused the accident. If we assume that a judge or jury decided that fault was 50-50 and that the value of the claim was $5000, the 50% of fault attributed to the injured person ( in this case, the bicyclist) the bicyclists 50% of fault reduces the damages paid to the bicyclist by 50%. Here, in a case with a value of $5,000 and the injured person 50% at fault, using the rules of comparative fault, the plaintiff's recovery is reduced by 50%, and she is paid $2,500, which is 50% of the full value of the case.

Automobile drivers are not always at fault in a bicycle versus car collisions. There is no uniform scenario of who is at fault in bicycle-car accidents. Sometimes collisions are produced by a car driver's inattention or negligence, and other times, collisions are caused by a bicycle rider's negligence or inattention. Sometimes, both car drivers and bicycle riders fail to follow the rules of the road as outlined in the vehicle code. Sometimes, no fault can be proven on either the car driver or the bicycle rider. The facts in every case determine who is at fault. Because the facts are so important, anytime a bicyclist is in an accident, they should make sure to record as much information as possible about the facts of the collision: who was going at what speed? Who was going in which direction? Who had a stop sign? Who was going too fast or too slow? Is there any evidence or debris that tells us anything about the collision? Is there any indication that anyone was impaired by drugs or alcohol? What do the witnesses say? Is there any video that shows us exactly what happened so that a full, fair, and complete analysis can be made? Because the determination of fault is so factually intensive, where fault is disputed, it is critical to find and retain an honest, competent personal injury lawyer who understands how to reconstruct bicycle accidents and prepare the case in a way that most accurately and fairly demonstrates who was at fault.

Whether or not an injured cyclist needs a lawyer depends on the nature and extent of the injuries sustained. Where a serious injury occurs, one that requires hospitalization, surgery, extended treatment lasting longer than a month, future medical treatment or bills, significant loss of wages, or other financial harm, bicycle riders almost always benefit from having a skilled, honest, and experienced attorney representing them. In the same way, if fault is disputed and a complicated or expensive engineering analysis must be performed to reconstruct the collision, it is rare for cyclists to know where to find such professionals. Reconstructing bicycle accidents can be costly and time- consuming, and experienced lawyers know where to find competent, respected, and experienced accident reconstructionist who can recreate exactly what happened and make sure that the responsible party is proven to be at fault for any serious injuries that have occurred.

Experienced, honest, successful lawyers who practice in the personal injury field are almost always willing to provide a no-fee consultation and to work based on a contingent fee agreement. Injured cyclists should take their time and find someone who they like and trust, someone for whom they have received high recommendations, who they believe empathizes with their situation and will be a good partner working together to make certain that a full, fair, and complete financial recovery is achieved by way of settlement or jury verdict.