Proving Fault in a Motorcycle Case
The way that an attorney would prove fault in a motorcycle case would be somewhat different from how he or she would handle any other type of automobile or personal injury case, mainly because liability is different for riders than it is for people driving other types of vehicles. According to attorney Craig Simon of the Simon Law Group in Phoenix, a motorcycle accident attorney would start off any case by looking at the liability and then the damages.
Simon goes on to explain that in the majority of motorcycle accident cases, the other driver is at fault. Drivers who are in regularly sized vehicles frequently fail to yield to motorcycles, generally because they did not see the motorcycles pulling out from side streets or driveways. In a legal sense, this is known as inattentive blindness.
Inattentive blindness is a major cause of motorcycle accidents, which is why Simon says that a motorcycle accident attorney in Phoenix would start his investigation by finding out whether inattentive blindness was to blame for the collision that occurred. The term inattentive blindness means that the motorcycle is there, but for whatever reason his presence is not registering in the vehicle driver’s mind. Drivers are typically trained to see cars, and seeing a single headlight sometimes does not register in peoples’ minds.
As a motorcycle accident attorney in Phoenix, however, Simon says that inattentive blindness is not a justification or a defense for a motorcycle collision.
Another element that Simon will look at in these types of cases is the speed that the motorcyclist and the driver were going. Simon is looking to make sure that the motorcyclist was not going at an excessive rate of speed, since speeding could contribute to the collision.
When it comes to damages, Simon is a motorcycle accident attorney in Phoenix who says people need to understand that whether the rider was wearing a helmet will matter when it comes to the amount of compensation that he or she can collect. Although Arizona does not have a helmet law – meaning that people who are 18 years or older do not have to wear a helmet when they are operating a motorcycle – riders should know that they will not be entitled to compensation for any injuries they sustain due to a failure to wear a helmet.
Simon says this comes up most commonly in cases where riders are rear ended and thrown off their bikes. If a rider sustains head injuries during the accident because he was not wearing a helmet, then those head injuries would not be compensable even though any other bodily injuries he sustained, such as broken limbs, would be.
*Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. You should not rely on this article as a legal opinion on any specific facts or circumstances, and you should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Publication of this article and your receipt of this article does not create an attorney-client relationship.