If you get doored, who's at fault?
 

bicyclist or driver?

Driver. The only fault of the cyclist is putting him or herself into the line of fire.

Physics says 99% of the time the damage/pain/death is the cyclist’s.

I understand your question is legal but a reminder where the impact lies.

Stay out of the door zone.

The driver, although the cyclist allowed that to happen by cycling within four feet of parked cars.

Most places require you to cycle as far right as practical without requiring bike lane use, and that's 11' from the curb where parked cars are present.

This is more important now that smart phones are ubiquitous, with many drivers delaying vehicle exit so they can check their email, social media, etc.

A Review of the Cambridge, Massachusetts bike lane study

"Practicable." There's a whole subforum dedicated to arguing over whether that's 12', 14', or *SEVENTEEN FEET* from the curb. (Obviously, all lanes are substandard.)

Reducto absurdum, we can get to Joey's Razor, everything is our fault for swimming with sharks, it's a war zone out there, blah blah blah blah.

(BTW, Massachusetts isn't a FRAP state.)

-mr. bill

Irrelevant. Don't ride in the door zone and you won't get doored.

How wide is the door zone? It's quite a bit wider than a lot of bicyclists think.


and


If a painted bicycle lane is in the door zone and there are parked cars next to it, STAY OUT OF THAT DOOR ZONE!

Cheers

And mr. door has checked in. Again. (Again, there's a WHOLE SUBFORUM for this propaganda.)

-mr. bill

Depends on the regulations, laws, and bias of those involved in deciding in your area. In a shared liability jurisdiction, then though the person opening the door might be at fault, what does that say for the cyclist where rules suggest they stay far enough away from parked vehicles to avoid doorings? Many of the bike lane rules say you can and should leave a bike lane for such. If a jury finds both share partial blame then it becomes not so clear cut.

Consult your own lawyer, free interwebs legal advice is worth every penny, *ESPECIALLY* from someone not licensed to practice law in your jurisdiction.

In pure contributory negligence jurisdictions, if the injured is in any way responsible for their injuries (typically 1%), you get NOTHING. (That's Alabama, Maryland, North Carolina, and Virginia. DC too, except if you are on a bicycle or on foot.)

So, ride "too right" and get hit by someone opening a door, you get NOTHING. Ride "too left" and get hit by someone passing you in a car, you get NOTHING. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

(In comparative negligence jurisdictions, typically if you are more than 50% at fault, you get NOTHING. If you are less than 50% at fault, your damages are reduced by the percent you were found at fault. You know the police officer who gave YOU a ticket for hitting a car door, rather than giving the person in the car a ticket for hitting you with their door? YOU GET NOTHING! The same police officer who gave YOU a ticket for "taking the lane?" YOU GET NOTHING!)



-mr. bill

If the spot where the door opens is a legitimate lane, then 100% of the time it's the driver's failure to view oncoming traffic and yield.

That said, it's hard not to assume a solid (even majority) percentage of parked drivers are going to fail to even look. In that sense, a cyclist might well be grossly disregarding of the chances. But I wouldn't go so far as to suggest it's ever the cyclist's fault -- as the cause was disregard for oncoming traffic and failure to look, not the oncoming traffic itself.

JMO


That being said, I was taught how to drive a motor vehicle by a pair of exceptionally retentive defensive drivers. They were perfect as driving instructors. To this day, I still hear their little warning bells ringing in my head as situations arise. I almost always see something coming, imagine it could be worse, and thus avoid things that many would simply ride/drive right into. Because I suspect every other moving or parked vehicle, every pedestrian, every dog on a leash ... everything that might be a risk, if the stars align. One thing I try to do in tight spaces is: ride the bike in the vehicle lane, as just another vehicle on that road. Much safer. Where that's impossible, I generally slow my pace so that if a mindless parked driver does swing the door open without concern or looking, it's more likely I'll be able to brake or avoid the worst of it.

Who cares?

Ride to protect yourself and don't worry about right of way.

As always with Advocacy & Safety threads... <sigh>

Without regard to: victim-blaming the cyclist for riding here, or there, in the lane; or whatever they were or were not wearing; or if they were drinking at the time; or the laws in your particular region or jurisdiction...

The driver is 100% at fault for not looking before opening their door into a cyclist.

If I got doored I would accept 100% of the blame.

If you feel like advocating, you could encourage the 'dutch reach'. I attached an article that describes this car door opening technique. There might be others or better ones. https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlton.../#54f9f083535e

I know a bicyclist who was riding in the door zone of a stopped taxi. The driver opened up the door and the bicyclist ran into it, flipped and injured his back. The result? The bicyclist eventually settled for $500,000 Canadian. The driver had been stopped in a no stopping zone. Seems to me that the court completely overlooked the fact that the bicyclist was riding in the door zone. Btw, there was no bicycle lane there. The bicyclist should have moved into the adjacent lane to pass the stopped vehicle. So, in my opinion, that should have been a 50/50 share of the blame.

Cheers

Had it instead been an oncoming car that struck that blindly-opened door?

Don't know the specifics of the "lane" involved in the situation you describe, above. But if it's a lane for vehicles and the cyclist is just another vehicle, then it's hard to blame the oncoming vehicle for being where it's supposed to be. No matter the type of vehicle.

Here was the situation.

Two lanes eastbound. Stopped car in the right lane. Bicyclist or other vehicle should move into the left lane to pass the stopped vehicle. Bicyclist elected to stay in the right land and squeeze by the stopped vehicle. Door of stopped vehicle opens and bicyclist runs into and is catapulted off the bicycle and over the door. Had the bicyclist been a motor vehicle he's have been in the wrong for not moving into the adjacent left lane in order to pass the stopped vehicle.

Like I said, it seems to me that the blame for the crash here is shared 50/50 by the driver and the bicyclist. Incidentally, the bicyclist was suing originally for $1,000,000 but settled for the $500,000 because the case was dragging on for a long time.

Cheers

Seems to me you completely overlook the “fact” that the bicyclist was riding in the road.

...

Skål!

-mr. bill

If you get doored, whos at fault?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mtb_addict (Post 21540585)

bicyclist or driver?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drew Eckhardt (Post 21540694)

The driver, although the cyclist allowed that to happen by cycling within four feet of parked cars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mr_bill (Post 21541155)

Consult your own lawyer…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingston (Post 21540808)

Irrelevant. Don't ride in the door zone and you won't get doored.

---

---

---

---

Having been hit from behind and securing a legal judgement, IMO the subsequent outcome was not worth the disabilities and hassles. So while I don’t consider the question “irrelevant” I think it is inconsequential.

While it is prudent to avoid the door zone, many consider take the lane to be unwise, but especially on urban roads, lane position IMO is “situational,” and situational awareness becomes paramount.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...27c9e20927.jpg

I have touted this following video to illustrate the abruptness of dooring, and demonstrate a complete lack of situational awareness: ˅˅˅˅

wow! the video makes a good point about your instinctive reaction is to swerve away from a sudden door opening. In which case, you swerve into traffic...which might be worse than geeting doored.

Closest I've had to being doored recently was when a bus driver opened the door on his bus while passing me in the middle of the block. He was nowhere near a stop and was apparently trying to cool himself. Had he actually hit me (and it was close) I'm pretty clear on who would have been at fault.

I've had a couple of these passenger side door suddenly opening in traffic situations with cars--there's literally no reasonable strategy for avoiding that possibility.

IMO, that's why there shouldn't be a bike lane. If the cyclist had already been in the traffic mix, then there wouldn't be a dooring. Nor would there be both a cyclist in a avoidance maneuver with the door and potentially a motor vehicle in a avoidance maneuver with the cyclist at the same time.

Cycling paths of this sort just many times confuse right-of-way rules and even the application of common sense when actions are performed in the heat of the moment. Such paths also make persons in motor vehicles forget to include cyclist in their perception of traffic flow.

Since most drivers have only taken a driving test once in their lives and a cyclist maybe never, how can it be expected that the correct actions will always be taken. Many motor vehicle drivers have never even taken a class and even if they did, that was probably many moons ago as a 16 y.o. and doubtful there was any meaningful discussion of situation recognition and avoidance.