According to Bicycling.com, the bicycle accident occurred in 2014, when he struck an uneven sidewalk, resulting in a “ramp-like effect” that launched him 28 feet over the handlebars of his bicycle.

Apparently, a tree root had grown up through the concrete, raised it seven inches and cracked it, a condition the city was reportedly aware of the condition and failed to address it.

This is reportedly not the first time the city has paid out damages for bicycle accident injuries, though it is the largest amount the city has paid for this type of incident. Just last year, council members for the city agreed to pay $235,000 to a woman who was seriously injured after hitting a pothole while cycling in 2014. She was thrown from the bicycle, and suffered injuries to her head, pelvis and lower back, according to the San Diego Tribune.

That was one of several pothole-related lawsuits filed against the city in the last few years, each alleging city officials were aware of the dangerous condition, yet failed to address it.more

There was also a case involving an ailing 60-foot palm tree that fell on a man during a storm, causing him to suffer paralysis. Council in that case paid $7.6 million.

The most recent case involved a poorly-maintained sidewalk resulting in a bicycle accident. Plaintiff reportedly suffered torn spinal cord ligaments, as well as a stroke, in addition to numerous lost teeth and various cuts and bruises. He spent a full month in the hospital and then two months in an in-patient rehabilitation center. He continues to receive in-home care.

Here again, plaintiff alleged the city was aware of the potential danger of this uneven sidewalk, and yet failed to take corrective action or even post a sign indicating there may be a dangerous situation ahead. City attorneys initially insisted the condition was open and obvious, and therefore cyclist could have avoided it. Attorneys for the city also sought to introduce evidence of plaintiff’s prior history of mental illness and drug abuse. Although trial court was willing to allow evidence of the latter, it would not open allow the former.

A settlement prior to trial typically indicates a defendant perceives there is a risk if the case goes to trial, the jury will award more compensation than the settlement amount.

Here in Fort Lauderdale, the Sun-Sentinel reports the city is aware of at least 106 miles worth of bad sidewalks. City leaders have been working toward making the city more pedestrian-friendly and walkable. However, 25 percent are cracked, uneven or pock-marked, and that would cost $16 million to fix. That doesn’t even account for the more than 600 miles of sidewalk that are needed on streets where there are none.

It should be noted that the ordinance in this city requires property owners to install and repair sidewalks adjacent to them. While enforcement has been lax, it can still be grounds to seek compensation in a personal injury lawsuit if someone should trip-and-fall or encounter it on a bicycle.

Call Fort Lauderdale Injury Attorney Richard Ansara at (954) 761-4011. Serving Broward, Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties.

Additional Resources:

San Diego paying $4.85M to cyclist injured by damaged sidewalk, March 1, 2017, By David Garrick, The San Diego-Tribune

More Blog Entries:

Property Owner Liability for Dangerous Road Conditions, March 7, 2017, Bicycle Accident Attorney Blog

For the most part, these workers are diligent in doing their job safely. However, there have been some cases reported where the drivers are careless with property or in abiding basic traffic laws.

One such case was recently chronicled before a trial court in Seattle, where a bicyclist was awarded $38 million by a jury in a claim against a valet company whose drivers routinely took illegal shortcuts in dropping off and picking up vehicles.more

According to The Seattle Times, the 21-year-old at-fault driver and his co-workers routinely took an illegal shortcut cutting across a few alleyways and across two lanes of traffic. The drivers allegedly were never given safety training by their company (which profit nearly $130 million in the first nine months of last year).

And while the company didn’t direct its valets to take the short-cut, it was aware of the issue and never took action to stop it. Plaintiff alleged the company had actually received numerous complaints about this practice, yet didn’t intervene. In fact, these practices reportedly continued even after the incident in question, which occurred in October 2012.

Court records show that drivers routinely used alleys and shortcuts, rather than making the longer trip on city streets and through four separate intersections. Drivers were reportedly under a great deal of pressure to quickly get vehicles to and from hotel customers. Waiting through as many as four intersections was counterproductive, as far as the valet drivers were considered. The problem is it wasn’t safe.

While the cyclist was riding in the right lane around 4 p.m. on his way home from work, he was doing so in a lane marked by “sharrows,” which are the bike-shaped icons that are intended to let motorists know to expect cyclists. At the same time, the 21-year-old valet driver was crossing two lanes of traffic – while being perpendicular to it – and failed to see the cyclist. He was reportedly also distracted at the time of the crash.

The cyclist suffered severe personal injuries, including a traumatic brain injury, a shattered hip, broken ribs and internal bleeding. He had to undergo numerous surgeries, bringing his medical bills to $470,000 by mid-2015. His doctors testified he would likely need at least four or five more surgeries over the course of his life. He suffered permanent physical and cognitive impairments.

Before the crash, plaintiff was a traffic signal technician for the city, but since the bicycle accident has been unable to return to work.

This case is indicative of the fact that bicycle accident lawsuits can and often do result in damage awards that exceed six figures or even into the multi-million-dollar range. That’s because the extent of injuries is often so great.

Still, one must way the defendant’s ability to pay. In this case, the driver himself was a 21-year-old, who more often than not carry a minimum level of auto insurance. However, the company for which he worked can be held directly and vicariously liable, and luckily, this was a larger organization, which means it likely carried a higher insurance policy and thus there is more likelihood plaintiff will see all or most of his damages awarded.

Call Fort Lauderdale Injury Attorney Richard Ansara at (954) 761-4011. Serving Broward, Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties.

Additional Resources:

Bicyclist severely injured in crash with parking valet is awarded $38M, Dec. 16, 2016, By Mike Lindblom, The Seattle Times

More Blog Entries:

Florida Most Dangerous Place for Pedestrians, Analysis Shows, Jan. 21, 2017, Fort Lauderdale Injury Lawyer Blog

That prompted the Idaho Department of Transportation to take decisive action on the issue of bicycle safety in that state. Now, new drivers are going to have to educate themselves on proper interactions with bicyclists as they navigate roads throughout the state. Driver’s education curriculum will be updated to meet the criteria that will ask new motorists on license exams about things like right of way, minimum distance and blind spots.

While bicycle-related questions were always within the pool of possible queries motorists could be asked, it wasn’t a given and a fair number of tests lacked any bicycle safety questions at all. Then this little boy was nearly killed.

As a spokesperson for the state department of transportation said to the Idaho Statesman, “I think it’s fair to say this tragedy kind of opened up the discussion.”

Now, the next question our Fort Lauderdale bicycle injury lawyers would ask is: Why aren’t we having this discussion in Florida?

Consider this:

• The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reports there were nearly 750 bicyclists killed in the U.S. in 2013. That’s about 2 percent of all traffic fatalities.
• 68 percent of those who died were killed in motor vehicle crashes in urban areas.
• In Idaho that year, there were 3 bicyclists killed, accounting for 1.4 percent of all motor vehicle deaths.
• In Florida, there were 133 bicyclists killed that year, accounting for 5.5 percent of all motor vehicle deaths.

In January 2015, Florida unveiled a new written test for drivers and it was expected there would be some snags. But as the Tampa Bay Times reported, 3 out of 5 flunked the test in the first six months of 2015. In fact, there were some counties in which 80 percent of drivers failed it. This prompted officials to alter the test again, though they insisted this wasn’t to make the test any easier. Rather, they were simply trying to be more clear on the wording. But even after those updates, more than half of new test-takers failed the written test in June.

Tests are culled from a pool of 1,000 questions, but there was no assertion by anyone that there would be at least one or more questions related to bicycle safety, making it a lesser study priority.

Recently, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer requested a list of the top most commonly missed answers on driver tests in that state. Among those:

• When riding at night, a bicyclist must have a white headlight visible for: 500 feet.
• A driver should be extra alert for motorcyclists, bicyclists and pedestrians because: They are hard to see in traffic.

Other missed questions involved when it was necessary for motorists to turn on their headlights, when they are allowed to enter an intersection and when they have to report an accident.

To learn more about Florida bicycle laws, visit the Florida Bicycle Association’s website.

If you have been injured in a Fort Lauderdale bicycle accident, contact us.

Call Fort Lauderdale Injury Attorney Richard Ansara at (954) 761-4011. Serving Broward, Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties.

Additional Resources:

Idaho Adds Bicycle Questions to Driving Tests, Dec. 29, 2015, By Caitlin Giddings, Bicycling.com

More Blog Entries:

Florida Uber Passenger Killed in a Crash, Dec. 27, 2015, Fort Lauderdale Bicycle Accident Attorney Blog

The collateral source rule, also sometimes referred to as the collateral source doctrine, prohibits the admission of evidence that a plaintiff or victim has received compensation from some source other than defendant. The idea is a defendant shouldn’t have to pay less for a tortious act just because a plaintiff had health insurance or collected workers’ compensation.

Still, since 1984, the court had allowed a limited admission of evidence regarding certain kinds of free or low-cost future collateral source benefits. But that has now changed. In the Joerg case, the court ruled all defendants are barred from introducing evidence of collateral source benefits plaintiffs may receive in the future. These include Medicare and Medicaid. Given that almost all Americans will at least collect on Medicare at some point in their lives, the decision has widespread implications in personal injury law.

In many personal injury lawsuits in Florida, recovery of medical expenses – including future expenses – is a big piece of the puzzle.

According to court records in Joerg, plaintiff here is a mentally disabled adult who lived with his parents his whole life and never worked. As a result of his situation, he received Medicare for medical bills. One day in November 2007, plaintiff was riding his bicycle when he was struck by a motor vehicle.

He filed a negligence action against the driver, as well as with respondant in this case, who was his own uninsured motorist carrier. Before trial, plaintiff withdrew his action against driver and pressed his case against the insurer.

His attorneys filed a motion to exclude all evidence of any collateral source of evidence to which plaintiff was entitled – including discounted benefits under the federal programs. Trial court granted this motion, but only with respect to past medical bills. When attorneys moved for reconsideration, trial court vacated that prior ruling and allowed the insurer to introduce evidence of future medical bills for specific treatment or services available to all citizens, regardless of wealth. However, it prohibited insurer from presenting evidence of future Medicare or Medicaid benefits.

Following a four-day trial, jurors awarded plaintiff $1.5 million – including nearly $470,000 in future medical expenses.

Insurer appealed, and the Second District affirmed on all issues – except with regard to the admissibility of future medical benefits. The court ruled that because plaintiff’s federal benefits were free and unearned, they should not be excluded by the collateral source rule. District court reversed on the issue of future damages and remanded.

Plaintiff then appealed to state supreme court. Justices held it was improper to introduce evidence regarding Medicare benefits because some are required to reimburse the agency for future benefits, and plus, there is no guarantee of these benefits. The court also ruled it was speculative to attempt to calculate damage awards based on benefits plaintiff hadn’t yet received and might never receive. Federal benefits – and eligibility for those benefits – are as always uncertain because they are subject to limited public funding or legislative action that’s unpredictable.

Call Fort Lauderdale Injury Attorney Richard Ansara at (954) 761-4011. Serving Broward, Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties.

Additional Resources:

Joerg v. State Farm, Oct. 15, 2015, Florida Supreme Court

More Blog Entries:

Roma v. Moreira – Duty of Landlord to Prevent Tenant Injuries, Nov. 24, 2015, Fort Lauderdale Personal Injury Attorney Blog