A post on the Finger Lake Cycling Club (FLCC) listserv raised an interesting question:  Is it a violation of NY Vehicle and Traffic Law for one bicyclist to “draft” another cyclist?

The suggestion was that drafting violates NY Vehicle & Traffic Law §1129 regarding “Following Too Closely”.

Below I pasted the full background of the question and the full text of the law but let me take a stab at answering the question.

My answer is “Technically, yes, it is arguable that drafting DOES violate NY law if doing so results in a collision”.

Sounds like a lawyer answer, eh?  Well, I follow the logic of Andrejs Ozolins from FLCC, a non-lawyer, but very smart and thoughtful guy who I think logically answered the question when he said that he felt that drafting constituted the ticketable offense of Following Too Closely:

“Seems fair enough — applying the same criteria as for motor vehicles.  Cars can draft and ride in tight bunches in the special circumstances of racing, but not when being used as transportation vehicles on public roads. In general, I’m glad for any instance where people (especially the police) treat bicycles as equal, legitimate users of the roads.”

And that’s the rub (or not, depending on your perspective)—under NY law, with limited exceptions, bicycles are treated like any other vehicle which means that they enjoy the privilege of being able to use the road like any other vehicle BUT it also means bicycles must obey the NY Vehicle and Traffic laws.  It is the old adage of “with the privilege comes the responsibility”.

So, from my perspective, a few points emerge:

• The language of the law is important:  “The driver of a motor vehicle shall not  follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent having due regard for the speed of such vehicles and  the  traffic  upon and the condition of the highway”.
• So, you can draft legally so long as you do so in a “reasonable and prudent” manner. That means good riding skills which means you are legally required to adjust your speed, spacing and position behind the bike you are following to take in to consideration the road conditions you are encountering.
• But you would be violating the law if you failed to ride in a “reasonable and prudent” manner by overlapping wheels, failing to allow enough distance between you and the rider you were following,  or when failing to reduce your speed when conditions required.

Thanks for reading and be sure to let me know your thoughts on this issue in the Comments below,

Jim

_________________________________

James B. Reed

NY & PA Bike Accident Lawyer

Ziff Law Firm, LLP

Mailto: jreed@zifflaw.com

Office: (607)733-8866

Toll-Free: 800-ZIFFLAW (943-3529)

Web: www.zifflaw.com

Blogs: NYInjuryLawBlog.com and

NYBikeAccidentBlog.com

ORIGINAL QUESTION WITH BACKGROUND INFORMATION

As I was pursuing my other hobby this morning (volunteer EMS) I was called to a cycling accident where a rider had touched wheels with another rider (as a consequence of drafting) and subsequently crashed.

As I was helping out in the back of the ambulance, the deputy came over to talk to the injured rider to inform him that since (my paraphrasing, here)

1) NYS law requires bicycles to conform to NYS V&T law unless otherwise stated in the regs, and

2) Following too closely is a V&T infraction, then it follows that

3) drafting a bicycle constitutes following too closely and is a ticketable offense.

He did not actually write the guy a ticket but it was more issued as a verbal warning, since the deptuty felt that by drafting, the rider was doing something dangerous.

Aside from being in rather poor taste, as I thought it over, I could not find a flaw in the deputy’s logic.

Kind of disappointing to think that drafting (and by extension, all pack riding maybe?) is technically illegal.

Are there other implications for this?  Could it affect someone’s health insurance coverage  if they revealed that they were injured while they were violating V&T law on a bicycle?

Seems a bit extreme, surely there is another take on this.

Can I get yours?

VEHICLE AND TRAFFIC LAW §1129—FOLLOWING TOO CLOSELY

§ 1129. Following too closely. (a) The driver of a motor vehicle shall

not  follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent,

having due regard for the speed of such vehicles and  the  traffic  upon

and the condition of the highway.

(b)  The  driver  of  any motor truck or motor vehicle drawing another

vehicle when traveling upon a roadway outside of a business or residence

district and which is following another motor  truck  or  motor  vehicle

drawing   another  vehicle  shall,  whenever  conditions  permit,  leave

sufficient space so that an overtaking vehicle may enter and occupy such

space without danger, except that this shall not prevent a  motor  truck

or motor vehicle drawing another vehicle from overtaking and passing any

like vehicle or other vehicle.

(c) Motor vehicles being driven upon any roadway outside of a business

or  residence  district  in a caravan or motorcade whether or not towing

other vehicles shall be so operated as to allow sufficient space between

each such vehicle or combination of vehicles so as to enable  any  other

vehicle  to  enter  and occupy such space without danger. This provision

shall not apply to funeral processions.

In discussing a Philadelphia bicycle accident case with a new client, we talked about some great Pennsylvania resources that are helpful to get an understanding of the PA laws applicable to bicyclists and drivers. I thought these resources might be useful to my readers who live in Pennsylvania or ride their bikes there.

However, before talking about the specific resources, I thought it would be useful to emphasize one important point I have made about the laws that pertain to bicycles in BOTH New York & Pennsylvania:

BICYCLES HAVE A LEGAL RIGHT TO BE ON THE ROAD AND ARE SUBJECT TO THE SAME RULES THAT ARE APPLICABLE TO OTHER VEHICLES USING THE ROADS!

This is a critically important point because it is important that cyclists, politicians and motorists, all understand that our roads are to be shared!  That means motorists need to be respectful of cyclists AND cyclists need to be respectful of motorists.

OK, let’s talk about those Pennsylvania resources that may be important in assessing PA bicycle laws and Pennsylvania bike accident cases.

A great starting point for PA bike laws is the PA Department of Transportation (PENNDOT) BikeSafe website. I have pasted the page pertaining to PA bike laws below for your convenience. You can quickly review the applicable laws.

Another good resource is the PA Bicycle Driver’s Manual where there are discussions of driving and bicycles. You can download a copy of the PA Bicycle Driver’s Manual here. There are many helpful illustrations in the PA Driver’s Manual like the one I posted with this blog entry.

Thanks for reading, and be sure to check out the important information after my sign-off here,

Jim

PS:  What is up with Pennsylvania referring to bicycles as “pedalcycyles”?  Talk about antiquated…… 

_______________________________________

James B. Reed, Esq.
NY & PA Bicycle Accident Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William St., Elmira, NY 14901
Tel: (607) 733-8866
Fax: (607) 732-6062
Toll Free: 1-800-943-3529
Email: jreed@zifflaw.com
Web: www.zifflaw.com

Please visit the New York Injury Law Blog at www.NYInjuryLawBlog.com
E-mail me at FreeReports@zifflaw.com for two free books:
NY Car Accidents and NY Car Insurance Secrets YOU Need to Know.

PENNSYLVANIA BICYCLE LAWS

Title 75 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes contains the laws which govern the operation of vehicles on Pennsylvania roads.

In Pennsylvania, a bicycle is considered a vehicle and, as such, is governed by a general set of rules (common to all vehicles) and a specific set of rules (designed for bicycles). The following annotated list provides all of the important sections of the Vehicle Code which a Pennsylvania bicyclist should know. Keep in mind that the laws themselves often describe only what a bicyclist is required to do, not how to do it. This manual addresses how to bicycle safely and efficiently by following the rules of the road.

Chapter 35 - SPECIAL VEHICLES AND PEDESTRIANS

Subchapter A – Operation of Pedalcycles (Bicycles)

Section 3501. Applicability of traffic laws to pedalcycles.

(a) General rule. — Every person riding a pedalcycle upon a roadway shall be granted all of the rights and shall be subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle by this title, except as to special provisions in this subchapter and except as to those provisions of this title which by their nature can have no application.

(b) Application of subchapter. — The provisions of this subchapter apply whenever a pedalcycle is operated upon any highway or upon any path set aside for the exclusive use of pedalcycles subject to the exceptions stated in subsection (a).

Comment: Bicycles are considered vehicles under Pennsylvania Laws and must obey all the rules of the road which apply to vehicles. These are the “responsibilities” mentioned above. The  “rights” refer to the roadway space required to operate the bicycle in a safe, lawful manner.

Section 3502. Penalty for violation of subchapter.

Any person violating any provision of this subchapter is guilty of a summary offense and shall, upon conviction, be sentenced to pay a fine of $10.

Section 3503. Responsibility of parent or guardian.

The parent of any child and the guardian of any ward shall not authorize or knowingly permit the child or ward to violate any of the provisions of this title relating to the operation of pedalcycles.

Section 3504. Riding on pedalcycles.

(a) Use of seat by operator. — A person propelling a pedalcycle shall not ride other than upon or astride a permanent and regular seat attached to the pedalcycle.

(b) Number of riders. — No pedalcycle shall be used to carry more persons at one time than the number for which the pedalcycle is designed and equipped, except that an adult rider may transport a child in a pedalcycle or in a child carrier which is securely attached to the pedalcycle or in a trailer which is towed by a pedalcycle.

Section 3505.

(a) General rule. — Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c), every person operating a pedalcycle upon a highway shall obey the applicable rules of the road as contained in this title.

Comment: This statement reiterates the necessity for cyclists to conform to the expectations of other road users in order to ensure the safety of all.

(b) Operation on shoulder. — A pedalcycle may be operated on the shoulder of a highway and shall be operated in the same direction as required of vehicles operated on the roadway.

Comment: A bicycle may be operated on either a shoulder or on the roadway (the travel lanes). The locations will be based upon traffic volume, the physical condition of the travel lanes or the shoulder, traffic speed, the bicyclist’s intended direction, and other safety factors.

(c) Slower than prevailing speeds.– A pedalcycle operated at slower than prevailing speed shall be operated in accordance with the provisions of Section 3301(b), unless it is unsafe to do so.

[3301(b). Vehicle proceeding at less than normal speed. Upon all roadways, any vehicles proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place under the conditions than existing shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic, or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into an alley, private road or driveway. This subsection does not apply to a driver who must necessarily drive in a lane other than the right-hand lane to continue on his intended route.]

Comment: Taken together, 3505 (c) and 3301 (b) state that slower vehicles should keep to the right, which is the normal expectation of all road users, while permitting bicyclists to make movements consistent with their intended route.

(d) One-way roadways. — Any person operating a pedalcycle upon a roadway, which carries traffic in one direction only and has two or more marked traffic lanes, may ride as near the lefthand curb or edge of the roadway as practicable, exercising due care when passing a standing vehicle or one proceeding in the same direction. Comment: Bicycles may ride in the left lane of a one-way street which contains two or more lanes. However, this does not apply to pedalcyclists on freeways. See Section 3511(d), below.

(e) Limitation on riding abreast. — Persons riding pedalcycles upon a roadway shall not ride more than two abreast, except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of pedalcycles.

Section 3506.

No person operating a pedalcycle shall carry any package, bundle or article which prevents the driver from keeping at least one hand upon the handlebars.

Section 3507. Lamps or other equipment on pedalcycles.

(a) Lamps and reflectors. — Every pedalcycle when in use between sunset and sunrise shall be equipped on the front with a lamp which emits a beam of white light intended to illuminate the pedalcycle operator’s path and visible from a distance of at least 500 feet to the front, a red reflector facing to the rear which shall be visible at least 500 feet to the rear, and an amber reflector on each side. Operators of pedalcycles may supplement the required front lamp with a white flashing lamp, light-emitting diode or similar device to enhance their visibility to other traffic and with a lamp emitting a red flashing lamp, light emitting diode or similar device visible from a distance of 500 feet to the rear. A lamp or lamps worn by the operator of a pedalcycle shall comply with the requirements of this subsection if the lamp or lamps can be seen at the distances specified.

Comment: Many car-bike crashes occur at night and involve a poorly illuminated bicyclist.

Bicyclists should understand that headlamps serve two purposes: a) primarily, they advise other road users of their presence (vitally important to prevent unsuspecting motorists from cutting across the paths of cyclists they cannot even detect), b) secondarily, illuminate the bicyclist’s path.

Section 3508. Pedalcycles on sidewalks and pedalcycle paths.

(a) Right-of-way to pedestrians.– A person riding a pedalcycle upon a sidewalk or pedalcycle path used by pedestrians shall yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian and shall give an audible signal before overtaking and passing a pedestrian.

(b) Business districts.– A person shall not ride a pedalcycle upon a sidewalk in a business district unless permitted by official traffic-control devices, nor when a usable pedalcycle-only lane has been provided adjacent to the sidewalk.

Section 3509. Parking.

(a) Sidewalks.

(1) A person may park a pedalcycle on a sidewalk unless prohibited or restricted by an official traffic-control device.

(2) A pedalcycle parked on a sidewalk shall not impede the normal and reasonable movement of pedestrian or other traffic.

(b) Roadways.

(1) A pedalcycle may be parked on the roadway at any angle to the curb or edge of the roadway at any location where parking is allowed.

(2) A pedalcycle may be parked on the roadway abreast of another pedalcycle or pedalcycles near the side of the roadway at any location where parking is allowed.

(3) A person shall not park a pedalcycle on a roadway in such a manner as to obstruct the movement of a legally parked motor vehicle.

(4) In all other respects, pedalcycles parked anywhere on a highway shall conform with the provisions of Subchapter E of Chapter 33 (relating to stopping, standing and parking).

Section 3510. Pedalcycle helmets for certain persons.

(a) General rule.– A person under 12 years of age shall not operate a pedalcycle or ride as a passenger on a pedalcycle unless the person is wearing a pedalcycle helmet meeting the standards of the AmericanStandards Institute, the American Society for Testing and Materials, the Snell Memorial Foundation’s Standards for Protective Headgear for Use in Bicycling or any other nationally recognized standard for pedalcycle helmet approval. This subsection shall also apply to a person who rides:

(1) upon a pedalcycle while in a restraining seat attached to a pedalcycle; or (2) in a trailer towed by a pedalcycle.

Comment: The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation strongly recommends that all bicyclists wear approved helmets whenever they ride.

Section 3511. Pedalcycles prohibited on freeways.

(a) General rule.– No person shall ride a pedalcycle on a freeway.

(b) Exceptions.

(1) On State-designed freeways, pedalcycles may be authorized under the following limitations:

(i) The pedalcycler is 16 years of age or older and is accompanied by a pedalcycler 18 years of age or older.

(ii) A written request for review of the freeway route based on the potential unavailability of a reasonable alternate route is made to the department.

(iii) The department determines that no reasonable alternate route exists.

(iv) The department publishes a notice in the Pennsylvania Bulletin authorizing pedalcycle access to the freeway. The notice shall constitute approval for the persons authorized under subparagraph (i) to ride a pedalcycle on the State-designated freeway.

(c) Action by local authorities.– Action taken by local authorities regarding permission to use pedalcycles on freeways under their jurisdiction shall be: (1) by ordinance of the local governing body; or (2) by a commission or public official authorized to act on specified matters.

(d) Operation on shoulder.- – If the department authorizes pedalcycle access to a freeway, the pedalcycle shall be operated upon the shoulder of that freeway whenever practicable. Comment: Bicycles may be permitted on freeways in Pennsylvania with permission of the Department. The applicant must submit a written request (form) to the Department for review. In addition, Section 3511(d) requires the bicycle to be ridden on the shoulder of the freeway.

In late December, a fellow member of Big Horn Velo and the Corning Race Team, Twin Tiers cycling groups, was in a serious accident.

Brian Klotz was out on a training ride when he was rear-ended by a motorist. I’m representing Brian in his case against the driver who hit him, and I’ve been able to share some of his story here on the NY Bike Accident Blog. Since his ordeal, Brian has been very open about his accident in the hope that his experience will offer a lesson to other cyclists.

The accident was in no way his fault, but Brian’s learned a great deal about insurance coverage and the extra precautions it’s smart for cyclists to take. You can read about his advice in the NY Bike Accident Blog post, “SUM Insurance: The Inexpensive and Important Coverage Every Bicyclist Needs to Know About.” He’s also been learning about the complicated legal issues involved in any car vs. bicycle collision, a topic I recently wrote about in the post “NY Bike Accident Lawyer Explains the Law in Car Vs. Bike Collisions”

I wanted to give readers an update on Brian’s condition and outlook in his own words. He suffered severe injuries, including a separated shoulder, which still requires additional more surgery. He recently shared an update about his improving condition and outlook in an e-mail he send out to other members of Big Horn Velo.

He wrote about the pain of his injuries, which included a concussion, deep gashes and the aforementioned shoulder injury. He says he’s reached a place that he didn’t think he could in the close aftermath of the accident – of believing himself lucky to be alive instead of unlucky to have been injured.

Brian is a fellow member of the Corning Race Team, and he thanks members  for their concern and help. I’m very happy that Brian singled out me, my paralegal Karen Wheadon and the Ziff Law Firm in general, to thank. Ziff Law is proud to be a sponsor of the Corning Race Team.

Brian says “Jim Reed and his paralegal Karen Wheadon were invaluable in helping me navigate the super complex and confusing arena of the legal side of the accident. I don’t know how Jen (his fiance) or I could have handled the situation through that traumatic time without their help.”

Thanks Brian, for your confidence in us and the kind words. I know we couldn’t be helping a more appreciative guy.

Brian ends with a description of his new training regimen, and how he’s been working hard to reach the level he was at before the accident. The accident has left both mental and physical traces – from more nervousness around cars on the road, to lingering pain.  Even with all his hard work, Brian is nowhere near being back to where he was before and he still faces another surgery this September.

“It’s been a tough road to recovery, but I am grateful for all of the support that I have had throughout, so to all in the riding community, I say Thank You,” Brian says.  “Getting back on my bike was my “carrot” throughout my recovery and without it, I just don’t know how inspired I would have been.”

I’m sure I speak for anyone who reads this when I say I marvel at Brian’s fortitude and upbeat attitude in the face of some very nasty injuries.

Thanks for reading, and ride safely.

-Jim

_______________________________________

James B. Reed, Esq.
NY & PA Bicycle Accident Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William St., Elmira, NY 14901
Tel: (607) 733-8866
Fax: (607) 732-6062
Toll Free: 1-800-943-3529
Email: jreed@zifflaw.com
Web: www.zifflaw.com

Please visit the New York Injury Law Blog at www.NYInjuryLawBlog.com
E-mail me at FreeReports@zifflaw.com for two free books:
NY Car Accidents and NY Car Insurance Secrets YOU Need to Know.

I wanted to share with readers a real-life example of the serious issues that arise in the aftermath of a bicycle accident.

I’ve written before about the cyclist I mention in this post. His name is Brian Klotz, and I talked about his accident in the post “SUM Insurance: The Inexpensive and Important Coverage Every Bicyclist Needs to Know About.” Brian was severely injured when he was rear-ended by a pick up truck last year and he’s made some difficult discoveries about insurance and his legal rights as a bicyclist who was struck by a car through no fault of his own.

I have his permission to share some details of his story. Brian and I both think his situation may be instructive for all cyclists who are required to share the road with motorists. In this post, I want to discuss what’s going on with the motorist who struck Brian.

The accident

Brian was out on an endurance ride on Dec. 28, 2009, when he was was rear-ended by, as he puts it an elderly man driving a pickup truck. The collision sent Brian into frozen hay field. He suffered a broken back, a concussion, severe bruising, deep gashes and a badly separated shoulder.

Now the question is what should happen to the driver who struck Brian? What punishment should he have and/or what kind of compensation does he owe to Brian. That’s what this post explores.

The two legal systems

There are two separate legal systems that may be at play in any bike vs. car collision: the criminal law system and the civil law system. Let’s discuss them one at a time.

CRIMINAL LAW SYSTEM

The criminal law system is involved when a person’s conduct violates a written law that prohibits a certain type of behavior: You cannot shoot your annoying neighbor, you cannot steal from the store, you cannot drive 100mph. Criminal laws include felonies (the worst crimes), misdemeanors (lower level crimes) and violations (the lowest level).

Included under the umbrella of criminal laws, are laws (usually violations) that control the behavior of drivers, cyclists, pedestrians, motorcycles, etc. The criminal law system is the domain of the police, the prosecutors and the court. As a civil lawyer, I play no formal or official role in the criminal system (although behind the scenes, I do strongly urge aggressive prosecution of violators of the law).

In Brian’s case, the driver who rear-ended him with was charged with violating Section 1146 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law of the State of NY which provides: Drivers to exercise due care. Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law to the contrary, every driver of a vehicle shall exercise due care to avoid colliding with any bicyclist…”

The driver in Brian’s case pled guilty to that charge and was fined $185.

I am sure I speak for all cyclists when I say that $185 seems a pittance for a person to pay for wrecking a cyclist, destroying his bike, breaking his back, etc. but quite frankly that very typical of the very small financial penalty imposed by the criminal court system in the typical bike vs car collision.

Restitution (a court order directing a defendant to compensate a victim for their financial losses) can be ordered by the criminal court but in the vast majority of the cases, the court does not order restitution and even when it does order restitution, restitution does not include compensation for pain and suffering or disability.

Thankfully, the criminal law system is not the end of the road for either the driver or the injured cyclist, as there is also our civil law system.

CIVIL LAW SYSTEM

Under our civil law system, a person who carelessly or recklessly injures another may be required to compensate the injured party for the full extent of the damages suffered by that person.

I represent injured cyclists like Brian under this civil law system. My job is to investigate the collision and preserve as much evidence as possible so I will be able to prove at trial that the accident was caused by the carelessness of the driver. Having handled bike cases over the last 24 years I know that the lawyers for the motorists always claims that the cyclist was at fault so I need all the ammunition necessary to blow away this nonsense defense.

My job is also to identify all applicable policies of insurance (no-fault, liability, health, under-insured motorist’s coverage, etc) to ensure that if I am successful in getting a large judgment against the driver, that I will be able to successfully recover that judgment from an insurance carrier.

Finally, it is my job to make sure that my client’s medical bills and lost wages are being paid by the appropriate insurance carrier. I can’t begin to tell you how much time I spend fighting with insurance companies to force them to pay what they should be paying but they are dragging their feet or offering some nonsense reason why they do not think they have to pay…..

In Brian’s case, the elderly driver only had the bare minimum of insurance required by NY law– $25,000. As anyone who has paid for any hospital visit knows, $25,000 goes nowhere these days. Luckily, Brian had the foresight to purchase SUM insurance as part of his insurance on his car.

As I have urged before, I believe SUM is the most important coverage EVERY cyclist should have on their auto policy. You can read more about SUM in my NY Bike Accident Blog post, “SUM Insurance: The Inexpensive Coverage Every Bicyclist Must Get.” Basically it provides additional insurance coverage from your own insurance company when the other person’s insurance coverage is insufficient to compensate you for your damages. SUM coverage is cheap and to put it most bluntly, I think any cyclist who is already paying a lot of money for car insurance would be nuts to not have at least $250,000 of SUM coverage.

At this point in Brian’s case, we have fully investigated the collision and preserved all evidence. We have ensured that his medical bills and lost wages have been paid. At this point we are unable to wrap up Brian’s case because unfortunately he still needs an additional surgery on his shoulder to be performed this fall.

It is my practice to hold off on settling any claim until my client’s medical condition has stabilized because once you settle a claim, it is over forever and therefore you want to make sure things are as stable as possible before settling. Accordingly, we are just awaiting the outcome of Brian’s surgery before entering in to the final negotiations with the insurance carriers.

I hope all of this lets folks have a better understanding of how this all works. Feel free to let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks for reading and RIDE SAFELY,

Jim

_________________________________

James B. Reed
NY & PA Bicycle Accident Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
Mailto: jreed@zifflaw.com
Office: (607)733-8866
Toll-Free: 800-ZIFFLAW (943-3529)
Web: www.zifflaw.com
Blogs: NYInjuryLawBlog.com and
NYBikeAccidentBlog.com

It’s sad that it takes the death of many cyclists before the NY Legislature took action to address a dangerous problem – motorists unsafely crowding cyclists while passing.

All I can say is, “better late than never.”

The  new law is known as Merrill’s Law. It requires that drivers in New York state keep a safe distance from cyclists while passing. The law was proposed in honor of Merrill Cassell, who was killed when he was sideswiped by a bus while riding his bike. The bus driver in Merrill’s case was not even ticketed.

In some states, it is mandatory for motorists to drive at least 3 feet away from the cyclist when passing. The new NY law is not quite so good. It is a little vague to require that motorists to keep a “safe distance” from a cyclist while passing that cyclist.

It will be up to the courts to define what constitutes a “safe distance” – but clearly if a motorist sideswipes a cyclist, they were NOT a safe distance away from that cyclist!

The new law has been passed by both the Senate and Assembly and is awaiting the Governor’s approval. If approved, the law would become effective November 1, 2010.

I came across the article “Bicycle Safety Legislation Passes New York Legislature” at WGRZ.com. It explains the issue and the legislation, and a copy is pasted below. The passage in red concerns the “safe distance” vs. 3 feet issue – and one lawmaker makes the point that 3 feet may not always be enough of a safe distance.

“Bicycle Safety Legislation Passes New York Legislature”

(CARA MATTHEWS, Gannett Albany Bureau)

ALBANY – Following the death of a 66-year-old bicyclist in Westchester County last November, the New York Senate and Assembly have passed legislation that would require vehicles to pass cyclists at a safe distance to prevent accidents.

Westchester Putnam Bike Walk Alliance member Merrill Cassell was biking on Route 119 at the Greenburgh/White Plains border Nov. 6 when he was sideswiped by a Bee-Line public bus and killed. The bus driver didn’t receive a ticket.

The legislation, which passed the Senate 57-3 last Friday and Assembly 102-0 Monday evening, now goes to Gov. David Paterson for his consideration. If signed, it would take effect Nov. 1, and violators could receive a traffic infraction.

Senate sponsor Andrea Stewart-Cousins, D-Yonkers, said Cassell, a Hartsdale resident, was a constituent who fought hard to get people out of their cars, educate the public about bike safety and make roads safer for cyclists. The legislation has become known as “Merrill’s Law.”

“And his death was certainly tragic, but we all felt that because he had given so much of his life to ensuring the enjoyment as well as the safety of bicycling that we should not let his memory be lost and certainly his death would not be in vain,” she said.

The bill would improve safety for people who cycle on right side of the road by requiring passing vehicles to keep a safe distance from the left side of the bicycle.

“It’s great that they’re doing this and it’s got his name on it and hopefully it will save many lives,” said Tania Cassell of Miami, Merrill Cassell’s daughter. “And it may have saved his life.”

Merrill Cassell was passionate about the outdoors and fitness all his life, running in numerous marathons, his daughter said. He became an avid cyclist after retiring as budget director for UNICEF, she said. “He just loved it. The neighbors knew him. He would wave to them,” said Tania Cassell, 43, of Miami.

Another piece of legislation that would affect cyclists would require planners to consider the need for bike lanes and paved shoulders when constructing or making major changes to roads. The bill passed the Senate. Assembly Transportation Committee Chairman David Gantt, D-Rochester, was pushing a version of the bill that would apply only to state roads, arguing that including all roads would be another mandate on local governments. But Gantt amended his bill Tuesday to match the Senate’s, said Bill Ferris, the AARP’s legislative representative.

The legislation would not require bike lanes, paved shoulders and other amenities if they were deemed too expensive.

On Merrill’s Law, the original legislative proposal was for a 3-foot passing law, which 16 states have, said David McKayWilson, president of the Westchester Putnam Bike Walk Alliance. There was opposition in the Assembly, so the bill was changed to passing at a safe distance. Eight states have such laws, including Oregon and Washington, which are pro-bike states, he said. In some circumstances 3 feet may not be enough, said Wilson, such as when trucks pass bikers.

The Westchester Putnam Bike Walk Alliance and the Westchester Cycle Club, which Wilson also heads, and the New York Bicycle Coalition worked together to lobby for the legislation. “It’s unfortunate that it took the death of Merrill Cassell to make it happen, but if there’s something good that came out of his death, then we’re glad to be able to do this in his honor,” Wilson said.

In explaining the bill to the Assembly Monday, Assemblywoman Amy Paulin, D-Scarsdale, Westchester County, said proponents want to “call attention to the fact that there have been many instances as of late where bicyclists have been killed essentially by motorists because of their hazardous driving or they’ve driven too close to them.”

Paulin, who was hit by a car and knocked off her bike as a teenager in Brooklyn, conceded that the legislation would be difficult to enforce.

Assemblyman Robert Castelli, R-Goldens Bridge, voted for the bill but said that, as a former member of the State Police, he is concerned enforcement would “be very iffy.”

“While I appreciate the idea that there is a discretionary aspect to the enforcement of it, it’s impossible to codify what safe distance is when you are dealing under these circumstances. And what’s safe to one officer may not be safe to another,” he said.

Thanks for reading and RIDE SAFELY,

Jim

_________________________________

James B. Reed
NY & PA Bicycle Accident Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
Mailto: jreed@zifflaw.com
Office: (607)733-8866
Toll-Free: 800-ZIFFLAW (943-3529)
Web: www.zifflaw.com
Blogs: NYInjuryLawBlog.com and
NYBikeAccidentBlog.com

Bike Law 101 from Jim Reed on Vimeo.

The great folks at Avvo.com asked if I would be willing to conduct an online seminar on bicycles and the law. I was happy to do so.

If you aren’t familiar with Avvo, it’s an online legal directory. Avvo lists thousands of lawyers – with ratings and reviews. You can find a local lawyer based on location or area of legal expertise.

Avvo also offers information from lawyers about important legal topics. I spent about an hour presenting the webinar Bike Law 101.

It consisted of an overview of some of the issues involving bicycles and the law, then I fielded a series of dynamite questions posed by listeners.

I received some nice feedback after the Bike Law 101 webinar, so I thought it would be worthwhile to link to it here for those of you who didn’t have a chance to hear it live. Feel free to contact me and let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks for reading and RIDE SAFELY,

Jim
_______________________________________
James B. Reed, Esq.
NY & PA Bicycle Accident Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William St., Elmira, NY 14901
Tel: (607) 733-8866
Fax: (607) 732-6062
Toll Free: 1-800-943-3529
Email: jreed@zifflaw.com
Web: www.zifflaw.com
Please visit the New York Injury Law Blog at www.NYInjuryLawBlog.com
E-mail me at FreeReports@zifflaw.com for two free books:
NY Car Accidents and NY Car Insurance Secrets YOU Need to Know.

Only three states allow bicyclists to ride side by side but require them to ride single file when being overtaken by a vehicle. New York is one of those states.

This fine point of bicycling on the roads came up recently when I read an interesting post, Two by Two by JeanneEmery via Road Rights. The post, sent to me because of my Google Alert preferences (I mentioned I’m an avid bicyclist, right?!) featured great information originally included in the articl “How and when to ride side by side, legally” by Bob Mionske.

Bob, an attorney and former Olympic cyclist, broke down states’ legal attitude about side-by-side riding into three categories. I’m going to focus on New York and Pennsylvania, where I frequently ride (and practice law!).

Explicitly allowed: In 39 states, the law specifically allows cyclists to ride two abreast. But there are nuances to this. Pennsylvania is a state that allows side-by-side riding without any conditions against impeding traffic.

In New York, however, bicyclists are required to ride single file when being overtaken by a passing vehicle.

There are nuances to the law

There are two important ideas to take away from this information: 1. Single file it in New York state when a your riding with a friend or friends and a vehicle passes you. 2. Even if your state allows riding two abreast, be aware that there may be subtleties to the law, and that local and state laws might be different. You could find yourself riding through an area that prohibits side-by-side riding altogether.

Which brings me to the rules for the other 11 states:

In 3 states, side-by-side riding is generally prohibited – that means it’s a no-no, unless there are certain circumstances, such as an extra-wide bike path.

In 8 states, it is implicitly allowed. That means that there are no rules prohibiting it, and as long as you are reasonably safe about it, it is unlikely that you would be cited by law enforcement.

As with riding solo, riding two-by-two safely relies a lot on common sense and courtesy. No matter what state you live in, share the road wisely.

Thanks for reading and RIDE SAFELY,

Jim
_______________________________________

James B. Reed, Esq.
NY & PA Bicycle Accident Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William St., Elmira, NY 14901
Tel: (607) 733-8866
Fax: (607) 732-6062
Toll Free: 1-800-943-3529
Email: jreed@zifflaw.com
Web: www.zifflaw.com
Please visit the New York Injury Law Blog at www.NYInjuryLawBlog.com
E-mail me at FreeReports@zifflaw.com for two free books:
NY Car Accidents and NY Car Insurance Secrets YOU Need to Know.

It’s difficult – and sad – to believe, but our government has had to resort to officially recommending that drivers respect the lives and space of cyclists and pedestrians. The Department of Transportation recently sent out a press release detailing its POLICY FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN ACCOMMODATION.

This is it, the official, federal backing for bicyclists to have a place on the road – despite the cruel and ignorant jokes made all too frequently on “funny” Facebook pages and in “edgy” radio shows. There are just far too many incidents of cyclists being seriously injured on the road for it to be a joking matter. I’ve excerpted the DOT’s tips from the official press release.

The DOT recommendations

The DOT encourages States, local governments, professional associations, community organizations, public transportation agencies, and other government agencies, to adopt similar policy statements on bicycle and pedestrian accommodation as an indication of their commitment to accommodating bicyclists and pedestrians as an integral element of the transportation system.

In support of this commitment, transportation agencies and local communities should go beyond minimum design standards and requirements to create safe, attractive, sustainable, accessible, and convenient bicycling and walking networks. Such actions should include:

• Considering walking and bicycling as equals with other transportation modes: The primary goal of a transportation system is to safely and efficiently move people and goods. Walking and bicycling are efficient transportation modes for most short trips and, where convenient intermodal systems exist, these nonmotorized trips can easily be linked with transit to significantly increase trip distance. Because of the benefits they provide, transportation agencies should give the same priority to walking and bicycling as is given to other transportation modes. Walking and bicycling should not be an afterthought in roadway design.

• Ensuring that there are transportation choices for people of all ages and abilities, especially children: Pedestrian and bicycle facilities should meet accessibility requirements and provide safe, convenient, and interconnected transportation networks. For example, children should have safe and convenient options for walking or bicycling to school and parks. People who cannot or prefer not to drive should have safe and efficient transportation choices.

• Going beyond minimum design standards: Transportation agencies are encouraged, when possible, to avoid designing walking and bicycling facilities to the minimum standards. For example, shared-use paths that have been designed to minimum width requirements will need retrofits as more people use them. It is more effective to plan for increased usage than to retrofit an older facility. Planning projects for the long-term should anticipate likely future demand for bicycling and walking facilities and not preclude the provision of future improvements.

• Integrating bicycle and pedestrian accommodation on new, rehabilitated, and limited-access bridges: DOT encourages bicycle and pedestrian accommodation on bridge projects including facilities on limited-access bridges with connections to streets or paths.

• Collecting data on walking and biking trips: The best way to improve transportation networks for any mode is to collect and analyze trip data to optimize investments. Walking and bicycling trip data for many communities are lacking. This data gap can be overcome by establishing routine collection of nonmotorized trip information. Communities that routinely collect walking and bicycling data are able to track trends and prioritize investments to ensure the success of new facilities. These data are also valuable in linking walking and bicycling with transit.

• Removing snow from sidewalks and shared-use paths: Current maintenance provisions require pedestrian facilities built with Federal funds to be maintained in the same manner as other roadway assets. State Agencies have generally established levels of service on various routes especially as related to snow and ice events.

• Improving nonmotorized facilities during maintenance projects: Many transportation agencies spend most of their transportation funding on maintenance rather than on constructing new facilities. Transportation agencies should find ways to make facility improvements for pedestrians and bicyclists during resurfacing and other maintenance projects.

Thanks for reading and RIDE SAFELY,

Jim
_______________________________________

James B. Reed, Esq.
NY & PA Bicycle Accident Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William St., Elmira, NY 14901
Tel: (607) 733-8866
Fax: (607) 732-6062
Toll Free: 1-800-943-3529
Email: jreed@zifflaw.com
Web: www.zifflaw.com

Please visit the New York Injury Law Blog at www.NYInjuryLawBlog.com
E-mail me at FreeReports@zifflaw.com for two free books:
NY Car Accidents and NY Car Insurance Secrets YOU Need to Know.

You won’t believe how ignorant and offensive some people can be about sharing the road!

A cyclist friend of mine sent me an unofficial transcript of a Washington D.C. radio show in which the host made incredibly stupid and crude remarks about “tapping” bicyclists off the road and worse. I wanted to share this info because I can’t believe that this guy can get away with saying these things and I’d like to clear up exactly what rights bicyclists have on the road.

As a bike accident lawyer who has represented too many dead and badly injured cyclists, what scares me about radio host’s Tony Kornheiser’s ignorant comments is that he has said out loud what many motorists secretly believe — that cyclists have no right to be on the road and that the roads belong ONLY to cars.

Sorry, Tony and other ignorant motorists, under New York law, cyclists have a perfect right to the road. See the blog post I wrote about a dangerous Facebook page and the real rights cyclists have to be on the road. In fact, Ray LaHood, Secretary of Transportation for the United States, has recently issued a policy statement ENCOURAGING the greater use of bicycles for transportation in the U.S.

Thanks for reading. Check out my other post: DOT Releases Policy Pushing Drivers to Share the Road Safely with Cyclists and Pedestrians.

The comments are from the Tony Kornheiser Show, a sports radio talk show out of Washington, D.C. Here’s the conversation, as related by  Tim Andrus:

Tony Kornheiser on cyclists: “Run them down”

Follow this link for more on the reaction of cyclists and Lance Armstrong. And try this one for the transcript of the Armstrong interview on Kornheiser’s show.

I didn’t hear the show today (or any show ever really) but someone wrote me to say that on this morning’s radio show on AM980, during a discussion of the new proposed bike lanes on Pennsylvania Ave, Tony Kornheiser condoned running down cyclists with his “big, more powerful car.” I’m listening to the show now, Once they put today’s show online, I’ll listen to it, so I’ll see if I can find where it happened (update: sometime around minute 38) and what exactly was said. But, let me know if you heard it. The person who wrote me about this also said that they contacted the radio station about the comments and they did not deny them, said that they took it seriously and that many people had called to complain.

Update: Here’s my take at the transcript. It’s not perfect, but it captures it. I don’t know the people so pardon my nicknames for them.

It starts around 31:15

Kevin: Reading: “The center of Pennsylvania Avenue from the White House to the Capitol soon may be reserved for just two things: the president’s inauguration and people riding bicycles. A pair of bike lanes are destined to grace the middle of one of the country’s most fabled boulevards, an avenue that ranks as a destination with Broadway, Fifth Avenue, Hollywood Boulevard and Bourbon Street. The two lanes will be part of an expanding network of dedicated bicycle lanes in the District, soon to include L, I and Ninth streets NW and more of 15th Street NW. ”

Tony Kornheiser: When I read about this early this morning, and I just assumed this would be one of those dedicated bike lanes…

Kevin: To the right

Other Dude: Like you get at the beach, just a little strip

TK: …on the right hand side, where bicycles are free to go – maybe two by two, but mostly one by one.

Kevin: And they never use them

TK: And I’m fine with those. Then I heard on Channel 4 that these things were going to remove an entire lane of automobiles, which last time I looked the roads were made for automobiles, and that they were going to somehow be in the middle and not on the sides and we were somehow going to be dominated, as if this was Beijing, by hundreds of thousands of bicyclists. And I don’t really care what they do on Pennsylvania Avenue, if they can’t ride a car on that anyway, but how are they going to get the bikes down there? They’re going to have to go through other streets. I think this is a terrible, terrible idea. I don’t mind those one lanes, but you get in Rock Creek Park and 3 or 4 of these people start riding abreast, and I swear to you it’s all you can do to not RUN THEM DOWN, like Wile Coyote’s, run them over. Just stay on the right. Stay on the right. I’m happy to share the road with you, but by share the road what I mean is you have room on the right and I have room on the road. Get the hell out of my way. Am I wrong on this?

Woman: Here’s the problem I have. I’ll give you bike lanes if we open up Pennsylvania Avenue on one side of the White House and the other street behind…You add this and it’s going to make it even worse worse.

OD: These chesty cyclists, I mean they take that right lane and they’re already moving over to the middle.

TK: And they all wear…my God…with the little water bottle in the back and their stupid hats and their shiny shorts, they are the same disgusting poseurs that come out in the middle of a snow storm with cross country skiing on your block. Run them down. I mean, let them use the right I’m OK with that.

OD: Or they can ride on the top of the curb

TK: I don’t take my car and ride on the sidewalk because I understand that’s not for my car. Why do these people think that these roads were built for bicycles?

Kevin: Because they’re crunchy granola, they just want us to live in a cleaner world.

TK: I know someone’s going to hate me for this, am I wrong?

Woman: I’m all for people truly sharing the road. I’m all for people getting their exercise.

Kevin: They don’t share it now.

TK: They don’t share the road. They dominate the road. They dare you to run them down.

Kevin: Yes they do.

TK: And then when you do, they get angry. What is that about?

Kevin: If you honk, they slow down…in front of you

TK: And so you tap them. I’m not saying you kill them. I’m saying you tap them. Tap them once.

Kevin: Just a spill, not a fatal spill, but a little spill.

TK: If you’re not rubbing, you’re not racing right? So you pop them a little bit and see what happens.

Kevin: They’re so annoying. This is a Fenty move. He’s a big cyclist.

Woman: With his security detail of course.

TK: But again, why can’t they just.. what’s wrong with the little lane on the right. I don’t drive in the little lane on the right.

Woman: Here’s the argument they would make – because the little lane on the right is often covered up by cars that are parked at the wrong time of day and buses that have pulled into the path…

OD: Tell them to take Metro

TK: Really? Then they can veer out a little bit. My objection to them is when the ride in the middle of the road. They give you the finger. They do all the time. They think they own it. Because they think that you think that you own it. I don’t think I own it. I own it. I have a car. I have a large powerful car compared to your stupid little bicycle.

OD: It seems a little discriminatory to me. What about unicyclists? Why can’t they have a lane

TK. They can have the same lane on the right. Anything with less than four wheels, or three wheels…

Kevin: …can use the right lane, if there is one. If there isn’t one, take the Metro.

(Group makes fun of Segways)

TK: so the whole city is going to be just for bicycles? I tell you, it’s Beijing. It’s going to be buses and bicycles. That’s all there’s going to be.

Kevin: There are plenty of paths. The Capitol Crescent Trail gets you to Georgetown and then you can take the Metro from there. Get on a bus.

TK: Yes. What is their problem?

(Group makes fun of leg shaving)

Update: From the second hour at 32:03

Kevin: OK get this Tony, we talked last hour about the expansion of bike lanes in the District, apparently a right hand bike lane isn’t enough for these people.

TK: It’s such a plague

Kevin: We’ve got to move them to the middle of the street.

TK: Why are they in the middle of the street?

Kevin: Well, who knows…

TK: I want to be in the middle of the street. I’m driving a car.

OD: It seems to increase the likelihood that they’ll be struck

Kevin: Google doing more for these people, they’ve come out with their latest product Google Maps for Bikers.

TK: yeah I know.

Kevin: So now you can google map your…

OD: Not bikers. Cyclists.

Kevin: Cyclists.

OD: Bikers ride motorcycles.

Kevin: The Oregonian, which is the newspaper of note in Crunchville, USA – Portland, Oregon. The Oregonian panned the new Google maps for cyclists, saying it was “incomplete and inadequate”. Meanwhile a couple of cyclist stories that have broken in the last few hours that are reflective of this category of people. In Brunswick Maine, two men on bikes tried to rob a pregnant woman. In Windsor, Ontario, two men on bikes assaulted a male driver through the window of his car after a road dispute. We’ve all been there before.

TK: They do that all the time. They go right up to your car and they start banging on your car, trying to make you feel guilty for owning a car and somehow the law does not allow you to run them down.

Kevin: In St. Louis, a woman on a bike riding in rush hour traffic blew a tire, tumbled into the middle of the road in front of oncoming traffic, she was run over by a taxi. She survived, but the taxi driver had to be rushed to the hospital with an injured neck. Meantime, Neal from Rockville wrote in to say that he recommends that you buy a Toyota, as it provides you with a built-in defense if you accidentally strike a bicyclist while driving to work.

Later, in response to a story about a prom being canceled to prevent gay couples from attending, he said “People just need to stop being awful to each other.” That’s good advice.

There were a few emails then about cyclists in the last two minutes. He ends with “if you’re out there tonight in the rain cyclists, wear white. Which you can wear with your ridiculous shirt and your fat thighs in bike shorts.”

So yeah. Just full of a lot of ignorance, windshield perspective and anti-cyclist comments. I don’t see a point in refuting them one by one. They’re just so ridiculous.

Thanks for reading and RIDE SAFELY,
Jim
_______________________________________

James B. Reed, Esq.
NY & PA Bicycle Accident Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William St., Elmira, NY 14901
Tel: (607) 733-8866
Fax: (607) 732-6062
Toll Free: 1-800-943-3529
Email: jreed@zifflaw.com
Web: www.zifflaw.com

Please visit the New York Injury Law Blog at www.NYInjuryLawBlog.com
E-mail me at FreeReports@zifflaw.com for two free books:
NY Car Accidents and NY Car Insurance Secrets YOU Need to Know.

As a NY bike accident lawyer, I try to stay informed about bike accident cases throughout New York state. Recently, however, a fatal bicycle accident case right in my own backyard drew a lot of press attention. This fatal accident occurred close by the Ziff Law Firm, in downtown Elmira. I’ve included a link to the WETM-TV video about the sentencing in this case:

Justin Appleby Sentenced to 1 to 3 Years in State Prison

The June 21, 2009, accident was a hit and run. Justin M. Appleby of Elmira was driving his Dodge Durango SUV after 1 a.m. on Grand Central Avenue when he hit 38-year-old bicyclist Michael T. Rautio.

Appleby left the scene of the accident – an act that coupled with the circumstances of the accident itself, has greatly embittered Rautio’s family and many community members against him.

Both Appleby and Rautio had been drinking that night. But only one of them was driving a motor vehicle. After the accident,  Appleby told his wife he had hit a guard rail. He also applied some deer hairs to his vehicle to make it look as though he struck a deer. It appears he was trying to avoid a DWI charge and the consequences of his choice to drive. He did not turn himself in to police until 13 hours later.

All of these details are recounted in a recent Star-Gazette article by Ray Finger, “Elmira man gets 1-3 years in hit-and-run death of bicyclist.” Appleby was sentenced on March 1, 2010, to serve one to three years in state prison for the hit-and-run accident.

The charges against the driver– WHY ONLY LEAVING THE SCENE?

Appleby was charged with Leaving the Scene of an Accident. Why not Vehicular Manslaughter or another charge that reflects the severity of the accident that took Michael Rautio’s life? Why not charge him with DWI?

The answer to that question can be a complex one.  It is the District Attorney’s office, in this case the Chemung County District Attorney’s office, that makes the decision about exactly what crimes will be charged.  They make these decisions after conferring with the police investigators and analyzing all the evidence in the case.  The DA’s office must determine what facts they believe they can PROVE.  As I often say to my client’s:  There can be a HUGE difference between what I think happened, and what I can prove happened. Likewise, the DA’s office must separate all the rumors and speculation from the provable facts.  Once they have done that, they must then decide how those provable facts fit within the definitions of the different possible crimes that they might be able to charge in a particular case.  Every crime requires the proof of certain facts– these are known as the “elements” of the crime.   So after analyzing the facts and the elements, a decision is made about the charges that will be pressed in a particular case.

Let’s use the crime of DWI as an example in this case.  Why was the driver not charged with DWI?  Heck, we know that he was at a bar before the accident so why not charge him with DWI?  DWI requires PROOF that the driver was driving while intoxicated.  Sorry but proving someone was in a bar does NOT prove that he was intoxicated.  It does NOT prove he was intoxicated at the time he was driving.  That sort of proof often comes from a breathalyzer test or blood test administered to the driver shortly after the accident.  Here, the driver did not turn himself in to the police until 13 hours later which is way too late to be able to prove intoxication.

Please don’t get me wrong.  I do not condone what this driver did.  Frankly, I think he’s a piece of garbage to know that he hit someone and left them to die on the side of the road without rendering any sort of aid or assistance. Do I think he was drunk when he ran down this poor bicycle rider?  Yes.  But could I prove it?  No, not based on what I currently know about this case.  Do I think this drunk driver probably avoided a DWI conviction by hiding like a cowardly dog?  Yes.

But with all that said, I do understand why the DA’s office might have made the decision to charge the crime they could PROVE rather than other crimes where they simply didn’t have the kind of information that would have been required to win a conviction.  Unfortunately, lawyers have to make tough decisions about proof all the time…..

The Judge’s sentence

Chemung County Judge Peter Buckley sentenced Appleby to the maximum for the charge against him – one to three years in state prison. Judge Buckley said that “Justice calls out for only one result, which is state prison.” Although it is likely that Rautio died instantly from his severe injuries, the judge also pointed out that to sentence Appleby to less than the maximum would send a message that you can get off lightly for leaving an injured person at an accident. How much worse for Rautio – or any bicycle accident victim – if they are left to suffer without assistance.

Community reaction

In the courtroom, the community, and in online  bicycling forums, many are expressing their feelings that the sentence was too light. In the courtroom before sentencing, Rautio’s mother and sister addressed Appleby, saying how much they hated him for depriving them of a son and brother.

The practical realities of PROVING the crime

It is tragic to the families of accident victims such as Michael Rautio, but the truth is that there a big difference between thinking you know what happened versus being able to PROVE what happened. That burden of proof is an exacting standard for attorneys seeking justice for clients and for the judges upholding the law.

In this case, the accused received the full sentence for the charges law enforcement officials were able to prove against him. To the accident victims family and an angered community, it’s not nearly enough.

Thanks for reading,

RIDE SAFELY!

Jim
_______________________________________
James B. Reed, Esq.
NY & PA Bicycle Accident Lawyer
Ziff Law Firm, LLP
303 William St., Elmira, NY 14901
Tel: (607) 733-8866
Fax: (607) 732-6062
Toll Free: 1-800-943-3529
Email: jreed@zifflaw.com
Web: www.zifflaw.com
Please visit the New York Injury Law Blog at www.NYInjuryLawBlog.com
E-mail me at FreeReports@zifflaw.com for two free books:

NY Car Accidents and NY Car Insurance Secrets YOU Need to Know.