E-Bike vs. TriMet SUV: $1.6 Million Settlement
In early October 2024, a Portland jury awarded close to $1.6 million to an e-cyclist who was struck by a TriMet SUV in a crash that took place three years earlier, in mid-2021.
This case highlights the critical importance of collecting all types of evidence following an accident—whether it be physical evidence or witness testimony, all of which can be crucial in reconstructing the incident. In this post, we will review the various steps and challenges the case went through before reaching the final settlement.
Obtaining Official Reports
Accessing the official report prepared by the police, state, or emergency services is crucial. This document serves as the primary source of information in any accident case. While we’ll later discuss its significance in the TriMet case, it’s essential to remember that this report is the foundation for all legal proceedings. Any edits, omissions, or alterations can be easily challenged when compared to the original report, making it a key piece of evidence that cannot be overlooked.
Documenting Medical Records
We must be highly meticulous and organized as we gather all our evidence and documentation. Another critical step is undergoing medical exams and treatments as soon as possible, and ensuring that prescriptions and treatment plans (including hospitalizations and major surgeries) are properly filed alongside the corresponding payment receipts or invoices.
In the unfortunate case of Kenneth Flippen (58), an Oregon resident, the most severe consequence wasn’t an immediate injury like a concussion, broken bones, or trauma. Instead, the primary injuries emerged after the accident, as deep gouges to his leg worsened due to the onset of flesh-eating bacteria, which severely impacted his overall health.
To illustrate the severity of the situation, the doctor explained that they had to excise substantial portions of discolored and decaying tissue from the victim’s leg. Following this procedure, they proceeded to graft skin from other areas of his body to mend the wounds.
Flippen’s legal team explained that he was hit by the vehicle once when the driver first collided with him, and then a second time when the driver backed up, running over his leg again.
Remember, any consequence or disability preventing you from living or working normally after an accident, even if it develops later as a result of the incident, allows you to seek compensation for medical expenses and suffering endured.
Utilizing Video Footage
In the case involving the e-bike rider and the national transportation company, a unique reversal of the typical situation occurred regarding video evidence. Initially, the SUV’s defense team argued that the cyclist was negligent, claiming that he was riding in the wrong direction on a bike lane. According to Oregon law, e-bikes are permitted to use bike lanes, so they leveraged this point as part of their defense.
However, the first trial ended in a mistrial due to unforeseen video footage from the victim’s GoPro, which captured the accident. Contrary to the defense’s claims, the video revealed that the collision did not occur in the bike lane but rather at a crosswalk, where the e-bike rider, like any pedestrian, had full right of way. This pivotal evidence shifted the direction of the case, underscoring the importance of video footage in proving liability.
Prior to reviewing the video footage, TriMet claimed that Flippen had collided with the side of the SUV and was cycling in the wrong direction in the bike lane just moments before the crash occurred.
Determining Shared Liability
TriMet was forced to revise its version of events after the emergence of video footage. In their updated defense, they continued to argue that the other driver was negligent, this time using the footage as evidence.
Let’s break down what the video showed:
- The e-bike rider was indeed going against traffic in the bike lane near Portland’s waterfront, riding the wrong way on the one-way Southeast 17th Avenue (which is a violation).
- After that, before reaching the intersection, he moved onto the sidewalk a block before approaching Southeast Lafayette Street (another violation, as these types of vehicles are allowed on bike lanes but not on sidewalks shared with pedestrians).
- The tricky part comes when they reach the crosswalk. Despite the previous infractions, the accident is only considered from the point where the vehicle was stopped at the crosswalk. The driver must ensure that no one is crossing, as any pedestrian, runner, or cyclist would have the right of way. Instead, the SUV accelerated and struck the cyclist. The law mandates that drivers yield to pedestrians, runners, and cyclists (including e-bike riders) in crosswalks, whether marked or unmarked.
- Lastly, bicycles and e-bikes must cross at walking speeds. Flippen was traveling at about 6 mph, slightly above walking speed, which is 3 or 4 mph, according to his attorneys.
Considering all factors, the jury determined that Flippen was 10% at fault, while TriMet was 90% responsible.
As we can see, every detail and piece of evidence plays a crucial role in calculating liability.
Referencing Relevant Reports
Let’s go back to the very first step. Remember how we were going to revisit the initial report? Having that original document is crucial, and it proved its value in this case as well.
TriMet initially argued that its driver had carefully looked both left and right before making the turn onto 17th Avenue, as recorded in the crash investigator’s report. However, their story shifted as part of a cover-up.
Upon consulting the police report, it was discovered that TriMet’s driver actually stated he had only looked to the left before turning. Essentially, the defense blatantly lied, trying to gloss over details that were already documented. If you have access to this data, they won’t be able to pull such tricks.
Even the smallest details can tip the scales in your favor.
About Settlements
Many people who are unfamiliar with these cases may view these substantial settlements as windfalls. However, those of us who have been close to victims of severe accidents—or who have experienced one ourselves—understand the critical importance of maintaining financial stability to facilitate full recovery.
It’s essential to recognize that the damages considered in these cases go beyond material losses and physical injuries. They also encompass psychological challenges that can be incredibly difficult to face. One such victim has demonstrated that even three years later, they continue to endure constant pain and are unable to engage in daily activities, such as riding their bike again. The trauma they experienced has led to post-traumatic stress, causing them to feel anxious whenever a vehicle approaches. Even simple tasks like walking their dog can leave them breathless after just a few blocks.
Settlements play a vital role in enabling individuals to seek therapy and counseling for as long as necessary, helping them move forward and regain a sense of normalcy in their lives.
Oregon E-Bike Safety Tips to Keep in Mind
Knowing these details can make your navigation in Oregon with an e-bike safer. The government has established these clear regulations for e-bikes:
- The minimum age to operate an e-bike is 16.
- E-bikes are allowed in bicycle lanes and on paths, but not on sidewalks.
- In the absence of a bicycle lane, e-bikes and e-scooters can ride in traffic lanes.
- E-cyclists have the same rights as pedestrians when crossing intersections.
Understanding these guidelines can enhance safety and promote responsible riding practices.