2/11/15 6:40 AM

Maine's highest court recently issued this opinion affirming a judgment in favor of a cyclist who was injured when a bus took a right while the cyclist was passing on the right. The court held that a statute providing that a cyclist passes on the right at the cyclist's own risk did not insulate the bus company from liability for negligence; and that a requirement that cyclists ride as far to the right as practicable did not apply in the circumstances of the case.

The decision is a fairly dry exercise in statutory construction, but gets to a good place. The Bicycle Coalition of Maine filed a friend of the court brief, and considers this a favorable opinion.

Possibly other states have similar statutes.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5969958107183926340&q=semian+v.+ledgemere&hl=en&as_sdt=10000006&as_vis=1

2/11/15 7:29 AM

I like that one of the key sections of the statutory language relevant to this decision refers specifically to both bicyclists and roller skiers. I enjoy both, and knew that bicycles are subject to most state vehicular codes, but didn't know that roller skiers are.

2/11/15 10:46 AM

That's way more fun than franchise law :-)

2/11/15 11:28 AM

I played a lawyer on TV once.. or was that a DR. ?

Good precedent.

2/12/15 1:58 PM

lucky for the cyclist ME is not a contributory negligence state....after what I have learned about NC's contrib neg laws (one of I believe only three states who have contrib vs. comparative) it makes we think twice about what I wear, not riding after sunset, and doing my best to maintain a proper lookout.
Learned all of this after the wife got doored at 25 mph....the truck door won....and so did the defendant.
Anyone cycling in Alabama, District of Columbia, Maryland, North Carolina, and Virginia should educate themselves about all the ways you could be injured and/or suffer property damage and be left holding the bag...of broken bike, or worse, body parts.