January 3, 2024
Helmet Use and Its Role in Personal Injury Claims
Bike accidents can result in serious injuries; when they do, questions about liability and compensation often arise. One significant factor that can influence a personal injury case in Oregon is whether the cyclist was wearing a helmet at the time of the accident. While Oregon law mandates helmet use for riders under 16, there is no such requirement for adults. Despite this, helmet use—or lack thereof—is critical in determining liability and compensation in personal injury claims.
In this blog post, we’ll explore the legal, medical, and practical implications of helmet use in bike accident cases and how it can impact compensation claims. If you’ve been involved in a bike accident, consulting an experienced Oregon personal injury attorney is essential to navigate these complex issues.
Helmet Use and Oregon Law
Legal Requirements
Oregon law requires all bicyclists under the age of 16 to wear a helmet that meets specific safety standards. Adults, however, are not legally obligated to wear helmets. This distinction is important because the law does not penalize adults for riding without a helmet, but their decisions can still influence the outcome of a personal injury claim.
Comparative Fault
Oregon follows a modified comparative fault system, meaning that if a cyclist shares some of the blame for their injuries, their compensation can be reduced accordingly. For instance, if it is determined that not wearing a helmet contributed to the severity of a cyclist’s injuries, this could impact the amount of compensation they receive. However, it’s important to note that helmet use is typically only relevant in cases involving head or neck injuries.
Medical and Safety Implications of Helmet Use
Protection Against Severe Injuries
Helmets are proven to significantly reduce the risk of traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) and other severe head injuries. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), wearing a helmet reduces the risk of serious head injury by 60% and the risk of fatal injuries by 37%. These statistics highlight the importance of helmet use for cyclists of all ages.
How Medical Evidence Impacts Claims
Medical evidence often plays a critical role in personal injury cases. If a cyclist was not wearing a helmet and suffered a severe head injury, the defense may argue that the lack of helmet use contributed to the extent of the injury. Conversely, wearing a helmet can strengthen the plaintiff’s case by demonstrating that they took reasonable precautions to protect themselves.
The Role of Helmet Use in Liability Determinations
Arguments for the Defense
In bike accident cases, the defense may argue that the cyclist’s failure to wear a helmet constitutes negligence. While Oregon law does not require adults to wear helmets, the defense may claim that a “reasonably prudent cyclist” would wear one to reduce the risk of injury. This argument is more likely to hold weight in cases involving head injuries.
Arguments for the Plaintiff
A skilled Oregon personal injury attorney can counter these arguments by pointing out that the primary cause of the accident was the defendant’s negligence. For example, if a motorist failed to yield the right of way or was driving distracted, the lack of a helmet becomes less relevant. Additionally, Oregon courts have historically been reluctant to allow helmet use to completely absolve a negligent party of liability.
How Helmet Use Affects Compensation
Comparative Fault in Practice
Under Oregon’s modified comparative fault system, a plaintiff’s compensation is reduced by their percentage of fault, provided it is less than 51%. For example, if a cyclist is awarded $100,000 in damages but is found to be 20% at fault for not wearing a helmet, their compensation would be reduced to $80,000. If their fault exceeds 50%, they may be barred from recovering damages altogether.
Non-Economic Damages
Helmet use can also influence claims for non-economic damages, such as pain and suffering or emotional distress. The defense may argue that the plaintiff’s decision not to wear a helmet contributed to their suffering, potentially reducing the amount awarded.
Steps Cyclists Can Take to Strengthen Their Personal Injury Claims
Wear a Helmet
While not legally required for adults, wearing a helmet can provide physical protection and a stronger legal position in the event of an accident. It demonstrates that the cyclist took reasonable precautions to minimize injury.
Document the Scene
After an accident, it is essential to gather evidence, including photographs of the scene, witness statements, and medical records. This evidence can help establish that the other party was at fault.
Consult an Oregon Personal Injury Attorney
An experienced personal injury attorney can help navigate the complexities of Oregon’s comparative fault laws and build a strong compensation case. They can counter arguments related to helmet use and ensure that the focus remains on the negligent actions of the defendant.
How an Oregon Personal Injury Attorney Can Help
At Dablow Law, we understand the challenges faced by cyclists involved in accidents. Our team specializes in handling bike accident cases and can help you:
- Gather evidence to establish fault.
- Negotiate with insurance companies for fair compensation.
- Represent you in court, if necessary.
Helmet use is a critical factor in bike accident cases, but it is not the sole determinant of liability or compensation. While wearing a helmet can strengthen your position, the primary focus in personal injury claims should always be on the negligent actions of the other party. Whether you wear a helmet or not, your right to seek justice remains. Contact an experienced personal injury attorney at Dablow Law to discuss your case and explore your legal options.