Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

Hard work and perseverance nets injured cyclist good settlement

Notices
Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

Hard work and perseverance nets injured cyclist good settlement

Old 07-20-10, 10:43 AM
  #1  
The Human Car
-=Barry=-
Thread Starter
 
The Human Car's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
Posts: 4,077
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Hard work and perseverance nets injured cyclist good settlement

Via Witkop Justice Observations
legal observations from a Rockville Maryland lawyer who has a criminal and civil trial practice

Hard work and perseverance nets injured cyclist good settlement

Recently a young woman who was a victim of a bicycle accident came to me. She was riding her bicycle southbound on 18th St between parked cars and traffic. It was rush hour and the traffic was moving forward slowly, stopping and starting. Ahead of her coming the opposite direction was the defendant car driver. He made a left and cut into her lane and struck her with the front of his vehicle in her left knee. At the time of the accident it was daytime and she was traveling probably 10 mph in a 25 mph zone. She was knocked to the ground and suffered a knee injury and significant bruising.

The driver of the car did not speak to her and seemed preoccupied with the damage to his sport utility vehicle. People around the scene helped the fallen bicyclist. I only had one witness who actually saw the accident and she was not cooperative with my investigation. An ambulance came and she was taken to the hospital. She suffered a non-fracture injury to her left knee and was put on crutches and released. She recovered and after approximately 1 1/2 years after the accident she is still having some knee problems.

She hired a lawyer for settlement purposes and the insurance company denied liability. The claimed that their driver was not at fault for the accident and further, that she was at fault for riding between parked cars and moving traffic.

After her first lawyer could not resolve the case, she came to me. I did not bother calling the insurance company. I did not ask them to reconsider their position. I merely filed suit in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia.

Filing suit was the easy part. The defendant driver was a lawyer who actually had a high-ranking government position. My process server tried to serve him at home. The defendant lawyer lived in an expensive house and had servants. The servants would claim that the defendant was not home and service failed. I tried to have him served as his government office and his secretary would not accept service or let my process server see him. Finally I was able to serve him by certified mail through his mail room.

Of course the insurance company again denied liability. I went to the accident scene and took measurements and photographs. It was clear to me that the defendant was negligent in his driving. They took the deposition of my client. Prior to the deposition I spoke at length with my client and had her also go to the accident scene so the facts would be clear in her mind and she could speak with confidence. I talked with there as to what questions she could anticipate from the insurance company lawyer. At her deposition she was very credible and sympathetic.

I took the deposition of the defendant lawyer and he could not understand how this accident could possibly be his fault. He stated that he was angry at the bicyclist because she could've killed herself. He believed that the fact that she was silent after the accident was an indication that she was planning to sue him. Most importantly, he testified that when he looked to the right he only looked approximately 15 feet because after that his line of vision was cut off. He began moving his car and ran over the bicyclist. I was able to preserve the argument that he should not have moved at all because he could not look far enough up the road. His testimony looked fairly poor for him.

Through the assistance of the Washington area bicycle Association I was able to find a regulation which permits "lane splitting". There is a regulation which allows bicyclists to go between parked cars and traffic as long as it is done safely.

I provided this information to the insurance company lawyer and they finally accepted liability and made a very low offer. After a period of negotiation we were able to get the offer into a reasonable area. Even the court appointed mediator believed that the plaintiff secured a good settlement.

It took many hours of work which included visiting the accident scene, chasing down witnesses and getting their statements, preparing my client for her deposition, preparing for the deposition of the defendant, researching applicable law but the result was worth it: we turned the case around from zero to significant money for my client for the injury she suffered.

https://witkopjustice.blogspot.com/20...s-injured.html
__________________
Cycling Advocate
https://BaltimoreSpokes.org
. . . o
. . /L
=()>()
The Human Car is offline  
Old 07-20-10, 10:54 AM
  #2  
Seattle Forrest
Senior Member
 
Seattle Forrest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 22,128
Mentioned: 78 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15210 Post(s)
Liked 6,394 Times in 3,622 Posts
Originally Posted by The Human Car View Post
The driver of the car did not speak to her and seemed preoccupied with the damage to his sport utility vehicle.
... imagine that.

It's good that some shadow of justice was accomplished.
Seattle Forrest is offline  
Old 07-20-10, 02:03 PM
  #3  
Digital_Cowboy
Senior Member
 
Digital_Cowboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352

Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
One of the things I have to laugh at in this article is that the driver was also a lawyer and he assumed that because the person that he hit was silent after being struck indicated that she was planning to sue. Hmm, shouldn't he as a lawyer know better then to assume facts not in evidence? And why do I think that it is safe to presume that any lawyer worth his/her salt advises their clients NOT to say anything until they've had time to confer with their lawyer? So why was it "wrong" for his victim not to say anything?

I also like how he has limited sight lines and shouldn't have been proceeding as "business as usual" yet he did and he attempted to place the blame on his victim. It was also good to see that lane splitting is legal in DC.

Also I would like to know however how his insurance company could think that their client wasn't at fault even though he hit the cyclist head on while she was riding with the flow of traffic.

What was his reaction when he finally realized that he was at fault for the crash?
Digital_Cowboy is offline  
Old 07-20-10, 03:56 PM
  #4  
dougmc
Senior Member
 
dougmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 3,039

Bikes: Bacchetta Giro, Strada

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Digital_Cowboy View Post
Also I would like to know however how his insurance company could think that their client wasn't at fault even though he hit the cyclist head on while she was riding with the flow of traffic.
It's likely is that the insurance company knew no such thing, but refusing the claim made sense from a business standpoint, that refusing the claim and then maybe getting sued and losing was a good gamble vs. just paying it out now. That's how insurance companies often work.

Originally Posted by Digital_Cowboy View Post
What was his reaction when he finally realized that he was at fault for the crash?
Oh, I can answer this one ...

... it hasn't happened yet. And won't happen. He lost in court, but that was just him getting screwed by the court system and that lawyer. Had they seen what really happened, they would have known, like he knows, that he was innocent.
dougmc is offline  
Old 07-20-10, 09:16 PM
  #5  
crhilton
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska
Posts: 4,568

Bikes: '07 Trek 1500, '08 Surly Cross Check, '09 Masi Speciale Sprint custom build

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by dougmc View Post
Oh, I can answer this one ...

... it hasn't happened yet. And won't happen. He lost in court, but that was just him getting screwed by the court system and that lawyer. Had they seen what really happened, they would have known, like he knows, that he was innocent.
Probably.
crhilton is offline  
Old 07-20-10, 10:29 PM
  #6  
Digital_Cowboy
Senior Member
 
Digital_Cowboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352

Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by dougmc View Post
It's likely is that the insurance company knew no such thing, but refusing the claim made sense from a business standpoint, that refusing the claim and then maybe getting sued and losing was a good gamble vs. just paying it out now. That's how insurance companies often work.
Wouldn't it have been mentioned somewhere in the claim that the insurance company's client had hit the victim head on?

Originally Posted by dougmc View Post
Oh, I can answer this one ...

... it hasn't happened yet. And won't happen. He lost in court, but that was just him getting screwed by the court system and that lawyer. Had they seen what really happened, they would have known, like he knows, that he was innocent.
Originally Posted by crhilton View Post
Probably.
Sadly, you're both probably right. I mean after all according to "most" motorists if we cyclists get hit, injured or worse, killed, it's "our fault" for even being on the road in the first place. Had we stuck to the trails and parks we wouldn't have been on the road with the "big boys" and would have been "safe" from those "big, dangerous" cars. . .

I just hope that the next cyclist that that lawyer crosses paths with fairs okay, as it wouldn't surprise me if he now has a chip on his shoulder where cyclists are concerned.
Digital_Cowboy is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
lnahid2000
General Cycling Discussion
12
06-20-13 07:27 PM
cyclisteaux
Advocacy & Safety
31
04-03-12 05:03 PM
BeetsAndBears
Advocacy & Safety
13
11-07-10 05:59 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.