02

Blog

A Change in IL Jury Instructions for Bicycle Cases

Controversy is percolating here in Chicago over the ethics of being a jerk on the road. The specific question pondered is, “Are Reckless Driving and Biking Morally Equivalent?” This debate emerged – as most do these days – from a post on social media. It then crossed the evolutionary threshold into thoughtful journalistic query thanks to Streetsblog Chicago editor and Chicago Reader columnist, John Greenfield. Since motorized vehicles are bigger, heavier and faster than bicycles and therefore more likely to cause harm, he asked, is driving like a jerk worse than biking like one? No spoiler alert here. John interviewed an ethicist from the University of Illinois Chicago for his piece to create an interesting read which I recommend.

In Illinois, all road users, drivers and bicyclists alike, must be careful in their interactions with every other road user. That is clear and is as it should be. However, does being careful mean the same thing behind a set of handlebars as it does behind a driving wheel? Should the law require all roadway users to use the same amount of caution? Should pedestrians and bicyclists be required to use as much caution on the road as motorists? For a very long time, at least one state, California, has said “no.” Illinois should follow suit.

Drivers must use more care than pedestrians

As in Illinois, Californians using the road are required to use ordinary or reasonable care for their own safety as well as for the safety of others. “Ordinary care” is generally thought of as the sort of care used by the reasonably prudent person. This is the sort of care that would be employed by a regular hypothetical dude who is neither hyper-safety conscious nor particularly careless. The facts and circumstances in which the events took place are considered, here and in California, when determining whether ordinary care was indeed used. For example, ordinary care while driving a car in icy conditions will require a different amount of caution than when driving in dry conditions. In this context, California has taken a very pragmatic approach when it comes to instructing jurors regarding the duties of care for pedestrians and drivers. California courts are explicit when guiding jurors. They are instructed as follows:

“The duty to use reasonable care does not require the same amount of caution from drivers and pedestrians. While both drivers and pedestrians must be aware that motor vehicles can cause serious injuries, drivers must use more care than pedestrians.

California Jury Instruction 710. (Emphasis is mine).

The Role of Juries in Bicycle Crash Cases

Personal injury cases in Illinois are generally decided by 12 regular people. A victim of injury (the plaintiff) alleges that one or more defendants (whether a person or corporation, partnership, etc.) acted badly thereby causing the harm. The “badness” of the conduct, or lack of it, is determined by the members of the jury based on what the law is. If the jurors agree that under the law the defendant(s) acted badly then they must determine how much money will help compensate the victim for his or her harms and losses. It is a huge, and sometimes taxing job. Juries make these determinations by listening to the evidence presented by all sides, then determining whether the defendant’s injury causing conduct violated the law. If so, the injury victim prevails and should be compensated.

It is natural for jurors to feel intimidated by this task. It is sometimes difficult to determine what really happened among competing versions of events. Further, how are they to know what the law is? Jurors are not trained in the law. Frankly, the lawyers on each side of the case are often not much help in this regard. They are advocates for their respective clients. How can they be trusted to accurately tell the jurors what the law says? This is where jury instructions come in.

Jury Instructions as a Guide for Decisions

At the end of the case, after all, sides have made their closing arguments, the judge reads jurors a set of written instructions telling them what the relevant law is. The instructions are just that; they guide jurors in how they are to set about deciding the case and rendering a decision. The content of the instructions to be read to the jurors is generally argued by the various sides in the litigation to the judge outside of the jury’s presence. The judge considers the arguments regarding how the jury should be instructed then renders a decision. He or she then reads the chosen instructions to the jury. The jury returns to their room for deliberation, using the instructions they have just heard as a guide for rendering a decision.

Adopting California jury instruction 710 in Illinois would greatly assist juries determining fault in cases involving drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists and other vulnerable roadway users. What I am proposing, to be clear, is not a change in the law; but clearer, better guidance to jurors. Authority for the use of the 710 instruction comes from the Supreme Court of California in Cucinella v. Weston Biscuit Company, 42 Cal.2d 71 (1954). In that matter, the court noted that “the elements of conduct entering into ordinary care or caution will vary and must be related to the particular circumstances involved, including the character of the act being performed.” Taking that basic principle into account the Court stated that juries when considering the degree of caution to be employed by various roadway users should be instructed that

[T]he elements of action constituting conduct which qualifies as ordinary care are those commensurable with the responsibility involved and depend on upon the character of the instrumentality being used or the nature of the act which is being performed, all as related to the surrounding circumstances.
The court held that because cars are capable of causing so much potential harm, drivers should be required to use greater caution than pedestrians. The court approved of two jury instructions which stated, in part:

“While it is the duty of both the driver of a motor vehicle and a pedestrian, using a public roadway, to exercise ordinary care, that duty does not require necessarily the same amount of caution from each. The driver of a motor vehicle, when ordinarily careful, will be alertly conscious of the fact that he is in charge of a machine capable of projecting into serious consequences any negligence of his own.
* * * * *
To put the matter in another way, the amount of caution required by the law increases as does the danger that reasonably should be apprehended.”

Just like icy pavement poses a greater threat of harm to drivers, motor vehicles pose a greater risk of harm than do other roadway users. Illinois juries should be explicitly instructed that they may take this intuitive truth into account when a vulnerable road user has been harmed by a driver. The California instruction only references pedestrians, and the Cucinella decision arose from a crash involving a pedestrian and a motor vehicle. However, there is no obvious reason why the rationale should apply to bicyclists as well. Like pedestrians, bicyclists are far less capable of potential harm than are drivers. The level of caution that bicyclists should be accountable to use should, therefore, be less than for drivers. Some will undoubtedly misconstrue this. To be clear, bicyclists own a duty of reasonable care to themselves and even more vulnerable road users like pedestrians. But the amount of caution required from drivers and cyclists should not be the same and jurors should be instructed as such. The harm causing the potential of their chosen vehicles is vastly different.

Such an instruction would be particularly useful in certain intersection crash cases. We see many cases in which a bicyclist is “t-boned” by a driver who has timed a traffic signal which changed as the cyclist made his or her way through the intersection. In Chicago at least, yellow lights last a mere three seconds. At many intersections, a cyclist (and certainly a pedestrian) may enter an intersection on a green, only to see the light change from yellow to red before making it to the other side. It happens a lot. On plenty of occasions, drivers see green lights like bulls see red and charge through intersections without looking for cyclists already proceeding across. But a driver’s duty is not merely to see green, but to see all there is to be seen, including bicyclists and pedestrians. Where a driver has failed to look and causes harm, a jury considering the matter would be aided by an instruction that reminds that driving a vehicle that has the potential to inflict significant injury requires the use of great caution.

Featured Image Credit: SFGate.com

Comments

Fairhope Bike Shop
Peter Wilborn Sep 16, 2019

Katie Bolton and her husband Joseph are the proud owners of Fairhope Cycle and Tri in Fairhope, Alabama – the eastern shore.  Their shop has been open for 8 years now and in addition to selling and servicing bicycles, the shop often is a “hub” for cycling events in the Fairhope area.   Katie grew up in […]

Read More
Rick Bernardi Sep 13, 2019

Stop as Yield. It was the legislative Holy Grail for Oregon cyclists. Idaho had pioneered the Stop As Yield concept—allowing cyclists to treat a stop sign as if it’s a yield sign—in 1982, and for decades, Idaho remained the only state where Stop as Yield was legal for cyclists, despite the actual practice being widespread, […]

Read More
Peter Wilborn Aug 20, 2019

A camera is necessary kit for every ride. But finding the right camera has been a challenge, until now. My rebuttable presumption: the Ricoh GR III is the best cycling camera of all time. Read on, and if you can prove there’s a better one, let me know. The Ideal Cycling Camera To find the […]

Read More
Human Shield Bike Lane
Bruce Hagen Jul 29, 2019

If you ride bikes around Atlanta, chances are that you know Niklas Vollmer and Andreas Wolfe.  They’re some of the many people in town who seem to live on their bikes and can be seen riding everywhere.  While they both have their “day jobs,” folks in the cycling world know them for their place in […]

Read More
Bruce Hagen Jul 19, 2019

This is a time when advocacy efforts are crucial to making our streets safer for everyone. Within 24 hours from the Two Wheel Tuesday gathering we suffered two more casualties.  On Wednesday morning, Marten Bijvank was on his way to work on his bicycle when he was struck and killed by an unlicensed DUI driver […]

Read More
AJ's Bicycle Shop in Iowa
Jim Freeman Jul 15, 2019

Bicycling Magazine recently published an article titled, “Hey, Bike Shops; Stop Treating Customers Like Garbage.”  The story follows a heavy-set 59 year old’s sad tale of how he was treated poorly from a number of local bike shops.   First and foremost, I would be clear that bikes are for almost everyone.  If you are big, […]

Read More
Bike accident scene
Rick Bernardi Jul 12, 2019

The big bike news out of the Oregon legislature this year was the passage of a Stop as Yield law. This was an enormous legislative victory for Oregon cyclists, the culmination of over a decade of advocacy. But it wasn’t the only legislative victory for Oregon cyclists this legislative session. A less glamorous but equally […]

Read More
Uber Biking Escort
Charlie Thomas Jul 11, 2019

I often find myself wanting to ride on a roadway corridor that doesn’t want me there. At best, I could make it across alive with some close calls and a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach. At worst, I wouldn’t be around to write this blog post.  Of course, a safer, alternate route […]

Read More
Cycling Without Age Bike Law
Brian Weiss Jul 11, 2019

The founder of the Lakewood Bicycle Advisory Team loves his life on two wheels. Gary Harty was born in Bellows Falls, Vermont, and raised in Colorado – Denver Metro area, and now makes bicycling in Lakewood, Colorado safe and fun.  Gary is part of the baby boomer generation. He attended Colorado State University (CSU) and […]

Read More
Rachael Maney Bike Law
Rachael Maney Jul 10, 2019

Outrage.  It is what drives action and engagement on the interwebs these days. If it’s not outrageous, it’s boring. The Election of 2018 proved that outrage increases TOS (“time on site”) more than friendship, sympathy, desire, or anything else.  Judgment. By definition it is necessary to reach any conclusion about anything. But passing it on […]

Read More
Stop as Yield for Cyclists
Rick Bernardi Jul 09, 2019

The Oregon Legislature made national news this past week, for all the wrong reasons. The State Senate, with a super-majority of Democrats in control, had been working on climate legislation which would have Oregon join a cap-and-trade market with California and Quebec. Unable to stop the legislation, Republican Senators fled the state en masse, preventing […]

Read More
Bike Law Alps
Charlie Thomas Jul 07, 2019

It’s Tour de France time. I follow the racing daily through the footage on TV feed and still photos. But I hadn’t ever considered what’s happening on the other side of the camera lens. Like, what actually goes into snapping these pictures that we see documenting the Tour’s happenings? I started to care more about […]

Read More
Load More