Not sure how the law varies from state to state, but here in South Dakota a motorcycle is legally provided the entire driving lane. This is why you are technically (and sometimes legally) not supposed to ride side by side with another motorcycle.

 

Last I heard a motorcycle is entitled to a full lane vs. cagers. We can ride two abreast with a fellow rider.

 

An oncoming car tried to turn left in front of your friend and then stopped 3/4 of the way, blocking the lane? And the cops are saying that's alright, because he still had 1/3 of the lane left to make a panicky swerve into? If so, that's weird and just wrong.

 

i always thought the lane-divide concept (splitting 1 car lane into 3 - A, B, and C "lanes", where A is the leftmost "lane") was just a way for DMV/MSF to describe where to ride.

For example, when riding in groups (ie. 3 or more, or even 2 if you like), they suggest to ride staggered, a bike in A, the next bike in C, the next in A... ACACAC alternating pattern.

Or when they say "stay out of 'B' " when riding to avoid debris and oil-slicks.

I didn't think it was a "rule" of any sort, where cars have to yeild a 1/3 of the car-lane to a motorcyclist.

 

No matter where the motorcycle is in the lane, the full lane belongs to the motorcyclist. (Lane splitting in California may not play into this too well though...)

 

Thanks for all the quick replies, guys!

Well, apparently the legal situation is a bit sticky because he didn't actually hit the vehicle blocking 2/3's of the lane. The accident happened when he tried to avoid the vehicle. That drives me nuts, because if instead he hit the vehicle (with the same exact circumstances), the car would be at fault automatically. Does that even make sense?

As a sidenote, the vehicle was waved over by the vehicle in the other lane of a two lane road - although I'm 99% positive that even if someone gives you a signal to go, that doesn't excuse them from any accident.

 

...As a sidenote, the vehicle was waved over by the vehicle in the other lane of a two lane road - although I'm 99% positive that even if someone gives you a signal to go, that doesn't excuse them from any accident.

Nope- I had an accident like that about 20 years ago, and it was MY fault, because regardless of someone else indicating it is clear, it is still your responsibility to make sure. And EVERY state says any vehicle is entitled to the full width of the lane. Actually, intentionally encroaching a motorcycle like that can be considered assault with a motor vehicle.

 

can be attributed to rider error

 

Anytime you fall to avoid, it's tough...it's an unfortunate truth.

As for the other side's argument, BS.

 

It sounds like a desperate lawyer's ploy. Who gives a sh!t what the other side argues. The law is the law.

Your friend should have better representation if this has become a stumbling block for his case.

 

It looks like the only thing that is really going to come into play is that there wasn't any contact with the vehicle. I'm pretty sure if you swerve and go off the road or lay the bike down w/o contact, it's your problem

 

Well contact or not, I would think if the driver is officially guilty of a traffic violation (failing to yield in turning left) and you can prove that the accident was caused by said violation, you can put blame on the driver. From what I understand the driver was NOT deemed guilty by the cop of a traffic violation because he "technically" yielded to the motorcycle claiming that there was room, regardless of the fact that the driver was 2/3 into the lane.

 

That sucks!
I hope it works out ok.

 

I understand that, but if he wasn't guilty of a traffic violation (which I think is BS) how could he be at fault?

 

When we learn to ride motorcycles, we learn that a lane can be divided into three parts - and that we can use that to our advantage when riding. But can that be used against us in an accident?

Someone I know has recently got into a motorcycling accident and the argument from the other side is that the car/truck technically "yielded" because the car/truck did stop (while taking a left turn) 2/3's of the lane in, leaving 1/3 of the lane for the motorcycle. From what I know, the lane dividing is a strategy for safe riding, not something legally defining a "lane." Has anyone come across this before? Advice?

As other have said, the operator of a single vehicle crash is typically considered to be at fault, especially as far as insurance companies are concerned (lost control of the vehicle and crashed). However, he still might have a chance of recovering damages from the encroaching driver through a civil suit. Depending on the damages, it might be worthwhile to talk with a personal injury lawyer. Did anyone get ticketed?

p.s., I'm not a lawyer and I give lousy legal advice.

 

Split decisions by the cop on the scene to ticket /not ticket mean nada in court. Indeed, the fact that the driver wasn't ticketed is inadmissible in court if your friend sues him, as it would be deemed unfairly prejudicial. The judge will instruct the jury on the law, and in this case, the law is that the approaching vehicle is entitled to the entire lane.

 

Wow, thanks again for all your great replies. Regardless of the fact that it may or may not be actually good legal advice, it shows you guys care at least. I will make sure to forward some of the advice, and actually I've learned a lot from my friend's accident as well. Too bad it had to be on his misfortune.