A bicycle accident can result in serious or even catastrophic injuries, since riders are essentially unshielded from harm resulting from impacts. Some of the worst injuries are from blows to the head, which are made worse when the rider is not wearing a helmet. What’s more, failing to do so can have significant implications for the ability to recover damages if they are injured in an accident.
Under California law, a bicyclist aged 18 or older is not legally required to wear a helmet. While the absence of a helmet does not generally affect the determination of fault for an accident, it can influence the assessment of damages. California applies the rule of comparative negligence, which means that if a person is partially responsible for their own injuries, their compensation can be reduced in proportion to their degree of fault. In a collision between a car and a bicycle, even if the car’s driver is primarily at fault, the bicyclist’s failure to wear a helmet can be found to worsen their injuries.
For instance, a bicycle is hit by a car and the helmetless rider is thrown to the ground, suffering a traumatic brain injury (TBI). While the bicyclist’s conduct may not have been a cause of the accident, the failure to wear a helmet could be seen as contributing to the severity of the TBI. If the court determines that the bicyclist was 20 percent responsible for the extent of the injury, and total damages are assessed at $100,000, the bicyclist would only receive $80,000.
The comparative negligence rule is designed to ensure a fair allocation of damages based on each party’s level of responsibility. In all accidents, the parties involved have a duty to mitigate damages as much as possible. However, the application of this rule can be complex in head and neck injury cases, since there may be a need for expert testimony on how wearing a helmet could have reduced the level of harm suffered. This form of testimony is also needed to demonstrate how the injuries will affect the victim in the short and long term and to what extent they are life changing, such as paralysis and permanent brain damage. An experienced bicycle accident attorney is essential for preparing a persuasive case regarding assessment and apportionment of damages.
The lawyers at Pulverman & Pulverman, LLP in Santa Barbara know how to investigate bicycle accidents thoroughly and identify the causes and responsibility for damages. If you or a loved one has been injured in an accident, call us at 805-962-0397 or contact us online to schedule a free consultation.
A bicycle accident can result in serious or even catastrophic injuries, since riders are essentially unshielded from harm resulting from impacts. Some of the worst injuries are from blows to the head, which are made worse when the rider is not wearing a helmet. What’s more, failing to do so can have significant implications for the ability to recover damages if they are injured in an accident.
Under California law, a bicyclist aged 18 or older is not legally required to wear a helmet. While the absence of a helmet does not generally affect the determination of fault for an accident, it can influence the assessment of damages. California applies the rule of comparative negligence, which means that if a person is partially responsible for their own injuries, their compensation can be reduced in proportion to their degree of fault. In a collision between a car and a bicycle, even if the car’s driver is primarily at fault, the bicyclist’s failure to wear a helmet can be found to worsen their injuries.
For instance, a bicycle is hit by a car and the helmetless rider is thrown to the ground, suffering a traumatic brain injury (TBI). While the bicyclist’s conduct may not have been a cause of the accident, the failure to wear a helmet could be seen as contributing to the severity of the TBI. If the court determines that the bicyclist was 20 percent responsible for the extent of the injury, and total damages are assessed at $100,000, the bicyclist would only receive $80,000.
The comparative negligence rule is designed to ensure a fair allocation of damages based on each party’s level of responsibility. In all accidents, the parties involved have a duty to mitigate damages as much as possible. However, the application of this rule can be complex in head and neck injury cases, since there may be a need for expert testimony on how wearing a helmet could have reduced the level of harm suffered. This form of testimony is also needed to demonstrate how the injuries will affect the victim in the short and long term and to what extent they are life changing, such as paralysis and permanent brain damage. An experienced bicycle accident attorney is essential for preparing a persuasive case regarding assessment and apportionment of damages.
The lawyers at Pulverman & Pulverman, LLP in Santa Barbara know how to investigate bicycle accidents thoroughly and identify the causes and responsibility for damages. If you or a loved one has been injured in an accident, call us at 805-962-0397 or contact us online to schedule a free consultation.