Riders involved in motorcycle rear end collisions can suffer life-threatening, and certainly life-altering, injuries. They often incur high medical costs, and they may be unable to work for an extended period after the accident. These circumstances make it all the more imperative for these individuals to recover fair compensation, but they also give insurance companies a strong incentive to reduce damages. At Herschensohn Law, we are familiar with auto insurance companies and their tactics. We have recovered millions of dollars in settlements and damages for our clients, and we are prepared to take your call and listen to the facts of your case. Reach out to our office today by dialing (206) 222-9553.
When Can You Sue for a Struck From Behind Motorcycle Accident?
Motorcyclists on Washington’s roads are generally eligible to seek compensation if they or their motorcycles are damaged by impact with another vehicle that strikes them from behind. The right to seek compensation, however, does not necessarily mean that the accident victim in a motorcycle rear end collision will recover the full amount of their damages, even if they win their case. Washington State’s comparative fault laws require apportionment of fault in such cases, with damages reduced by the percentage of fault that belongs to the claimant.
Summary
Motorcycle rear-end collision claims in Washington State allow injured riders to pursue compensation under comparative fault rules, even when partial responsibility may exist. Individuals may recover damages in a motorcycle accident, though compensation is reduced based on the claimant’s percentage of fault. State law defines fault broadly to include negligent or reckless conduct, shaping liability determinations in rear-end collisions involving motorcycles. During litigation, a jury or judge must assign percentages of responsibility to each party, while rear-end collisions often establish prima facie negligence against the following driver. Attorneys at Herschensohn Law work with individuals throughout Washington to help clarify legal rights and potential compensation following motorcycle rear-end collisions.
Motorcycles and Rules of the Road in Washington State
RCW § 46.06.330 defines a vehicle as a motorcycle if the vehicle operates by way of a motor (as opposed to by pedal power), includes three or fewer wheels (excluding any added by aftermarket stabilization kits), and the operator-vehicle interface is configured in either of the following ways:
- The motor vehicle is designed to be controlled via handlebars, and the driver is placed in a saddle-seat.
- The motor vehicle is designed to be controlled by use of a steering wheel, and the driver's seating area is outfitted with a safety harness and partially or fully enclosed.
Powered wheelchairs, electric bicycles, moto-scooters, and farm tractors are explicitly excluded from the definition of motorcycle under Washington law.
Motorcycles are subject to most of the same requirements for legal operation of their vehicles on Washington’s roadways as the drivers of fully enclosed motor vehicles, and they are generally entitled to the same rights as well. However, the differences in vehicle structure and the degree of driver exposure between motorcycles and most other vehicles can put motorcyclists at greater risk than their counterparts in the event of a rear end collision.
Who Is at Fault in a Rear End Collision?
Some states bar accident victims from recovering damages if their own fault contributed to the incident, a doctrine usually called contributory negligence (reflecting, perhaps, the fact that the tort in most personal injury cases sounds in negligence). Like many other states, Washington instead applies a rule known as "comparative fault." Under RCW § 4.22.005, contributory fault does not ban an individual injured in a motorcycle rear end collision from recovering damages, regardless of their percentage of the total responsibility for the accident. However, any compensatory damages will be reduced by the percentage of fault apportioned to the party pursuing the claim.
Definition of Fault for Rear End Collisions
Because the apportionment of fault determines each party's liability and therefore sets the terms by which any compensatory damages may be adjusted, it is obviously important to establish what constitutes fault in any rear end collision case. RCW § 4.22.015 considers any act or omission that is "negligent or reckless" toward others, whether that be by risking only their property or bodily harm, to constitute fault for the purposes of Washington tort claims. Some scenarios that would also constitute fault under Washington law, but would not usually arise in the context of a motorcycle accident claim, include breach of warranty and any conditions that would subject the person to a liability in a product liability case.
Determining the Apportionment of Fault
RCW § 4.22.070 requires "the trier of fact" (the judge in a bench trial, or otherwise the jury) to make a clear apportionment of fault in all personal injury cases that involve fault by more than one party. Because there is no doubt, in a motorcycle rear-end collision, regarding which vehicle struck the other, in cases where the driver of the struck vehicle is suing the driver of the following vehicle for damages there is usually also no argument over whether the defendant actually steered his or her vehicle into the rear of the vehicle that was struck. For this reason, the judge or jury hearing the case will not normally need to raise a question about whether fault is shared between the defendant and claimant. Instead, a contest over whether the plaintiff contributed in anyway to the crash and, if so, how much of the responsibility for the damages arising from the accident may be attributed to the fault of the plaintiff, applying the definition of fault established by RCW § 4.22.015.
Motorcycle Accidents and Assessments of Risk in Washington Rear-End Collisions
Because "unreasonable assumption of risk" is recognized as a type of fault under RCW § 4.22.070 and motorcycles are widely regarded as especially risky vehicles thanks to the relatively little protection they afford their riders, one way that you may see legal arguments over the apportionment of fault play out in a motorcycle accident case where the motorcycle was the vehicle struck in a rear-end collision is that the driver of the following vehicle (or their insurance provider) may try to argue that the motorcyclist's assumption of risk limits the compensatory damages to which they are entitled. In other words, the defense in the case may try to argue that choosing to ride a motorcycle (sometimes with additional claims made as to the road conditions and the appropriateness of the motorcycle rider's protective equipment, such as a helmet or eyewear) constituted an unreasonable assumption of risk, and therefore calls for a proportionate reduction in compensatory damages.
Is Riding a Motorcycle an Unreasonable Assumption of Risk?
At Herchensohn Law, we often hear from motorcycle riders who are concerned that the "thrill-seeking" reputation that can sometimes attach to even the tamest motorcycle riding activities may preclude them from recovering compensation. Some motorcyclists may be worried even if they were struck from behind in a motorcycle rear-end collision.
The short answer to many of these questions is that the decision to travel via motorcycle does not automatically obviate your right to compensation if another individual's negligence caused a rear-end collision in which you were injured. The pattern jury instructions for rear-end collision cases in Washington State make it clear that the party with the primary responsibility for avoiding a rear-end collision is the driver of the following vehicle. This principle applies regardless of whether the struck vehicle is a motorcycle, a semi-truck, or any other transportation device covered by Washington's motor vehicle laws.
Prima Facie Negligence in Rear End Collisions
The pattern instructions even include a statement that a following driver who collides with the vehicle in front of them in the absence of an emergency is considered prima facie negligent. "Prima facie" is a legal term of art derived from Latin; it generally refers to the "at first glance" or "face value" reading of the circumstances present in a case. In the context of rear end collisions, prima facie negligence means that the fact that a driver ran into the vehicle in front of them is usually considered sufficient to conclude that the following driver acted negligently.
The driver of the striking vehicle still has an opportunity to present evidence that might undermine the impression of negligence, based on the circumstances of the accident. The fact that the struck vehicle was a motorcycle is not ordinarily taken to be a circumstance that would absolve the driver of a following vehicle of their primary responsibility for preventing a struck-from-behind accident, however.
When To Call a Lawyer
Consider reaching out to a personal injury lawyer following a motorcycle rear end collision. Washington’s comparative fault laws for driver negligence can be challenging to navigate, especially when insurance companies attempt to reduce payouts by arguing that a struck motorcyclist shares a substantial portion of the total fault for the accident. In many cases, an experienced Washington personal injury lawyer can help ensure that the rider’s choice of vehicle or protective gear isn't unfairly used to devalue their claim, protecting their right to full compensatory damages for injuries sustained. Call Herschensohn Law today at (206) 222-9553 to book your one-time, no-cost consultation.
