Design Template by Bikingtoronto

« Wednesday Morning Commute - Faster Pussycat Kill Kill | Main | Thursday Morning Commute - As close to a CWL post as you'll get this year. Blame Tandem. »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I hope Micah fought the "passing on the right" ticket. If not, the defense will argue that he was operating his vehicle negligibly, and therefore gets no recovery.

Re: A Vision in Chinatown,

Please, no more 2-way cycle tracks.

"he's also suing the federal government because the cab's passenger worked for the Department of Homeland Security."

Well that's completely stupid and assinine.

Kolohe: If an employee injures someone "in the course of employment" then the employee can assign the risk to the employer.

Therefore, there are three non stupid reasons why it makes sense to sue both.
1. she was getting out of cab going into work: there is a good argument that she was on the job.
2. If liability lies with DHS, then she is out of this. If you don't sue BOTH, you could end up with nothing.
3. DHS has the money, employee may not.

The "due care" should already be in the VA law through the common law (you owe a general duty of care to act in a way that does not harm others).

Sad that it has to be spelled out.

IANAL, but if one argues that the DHS employee was on the clock, you're probably going get the sovereign immunity defense and get nothing.

" as necessary to pass with safety." in 1201.3 will probably screw his case, because filtering up when a car is already in each traffic lane at the light can be prima facie deemed unsafe. You don't have the right to create you're own lane. same thing with "on the side where traffic is approaching" in 2214.4. Traffic wasn't approaching - bicyclist created his own peril by creating his own traffic lane.

Arguing that an employer has responsibility for how their employees exit cabs, that's stupid just with common sense, and makes every stereotype about ambulance chasing lawyers fufilled - don't look for 'justice', just go after the people with deep pockets for a payday.

It also makes legitimate safely operating bicyclists that drive centerlane and don't shoal look bad by association.

Either way, I respectfully disagree with Micah Dammeyer for putting me as a US Taxpayer on the hook for this. I am selfish.

@Kolohe Nope, you won't get sovereign immunity, you'll get the Federal Tort Claims Act, where Congress specifically waived SI for tortious acts by employees. If she is found to be in the wrong, and she was 'on the clock', there's a good chance he'll recover from the employer, the theory being that a Federal employee isn't supposed to be violating the law in the course of their employment.

Part of the reason we make employers responsible is because employers have control over how their employees behave, and can therefore create a more safety conscious culture. e.g. UPS can make more money if its drivers drive faster. If it forces the drivers to speed, it gets the benefits, and the drivers get the tickets, and others get injuries. By making the employer liable, it forces its drivers to be careful.

ya know, there are like literallyjoebiden a million government and government contract workers that commute back and forth everyday in the DC area and multiple car accidents everyday somewhere on the freeways, parkways, and other roadways around the region, and I don't think the Federal government gets sued for most of them.

That's because in car accidents there is insurance. So the insurance companies work it out. This is a taxi cab passenger and a cyclist. Who insures them?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Banner design by creativecouchdesigns.com

City Paper's Best Local Bike Blog 2009

Categories

 Subscribe in a reader