Motorcycle Lawyer | Michael Padway, Motorcycle Accident Attorney

Motorport Customer Service

Fri, 14 Nov 2008 11:05:05 -0500

The Ultimate in Customer ServiceWayne at Motorport is familiar to readers of this blog. As you know, many of my friends kid me mercilessly about my belief in Kevlar for motorcycle safety. For new readers, I have been wearing Motoports Ultra II Schoeller stretch Kevlar for so long that I am not really sure how long it's been.

The web is full of Motoport vs Aerostitch comparisons. For me, it was an easy choice, because Aerostitch does not do custom sizing. My Motoport was originally sized just for me. (The old me, not the new me).

In the summer, I have a loose weave Kevlar shirt that lets the breeze through, and 1000 Denier Cordura jeans. Motoport did both of these by duplicating comfortable clothes I sent them, but using tough, abrasion resistant material, and incorporating their triple density body armor.

Anyway, the Motorport Ultra II is a critical piece of gear for a motorcycle lawyer. If I have enough of a bag to fold a suit jacket into, I can easily slip the Ultra II over whateves I am wearing. In a pinch, I could probably wear even the suit jacket underneath. When I get where I'm going, I slide a bicycle lock through the sleeve of the Ultra II, and over that pants. By the time I walk away from the motorcycle, I am ready for the courtroom.

Of course, the important part is that on the way to and from the courtroom, I am fully protected while riding both in terms of abrasion, and impact. Plus comfortable.

I had a little issue with heat from the exhaust of the Vision making the Kevlar shiny, but hopefully that was fixed with the heat wrap mentioned in my recent Thermo Tec post.

Anyway, I called Wayne, reviewed the fact that the Ultra II no longer fit, and started asking about replacing the gear. In response, Wayne suggested I simply mark the changes I needed, gave me a return order, and simply said I should send the gear to him for alteration.

A couple of things are amazing about this: 1) the suit is at least 8 years old, and I am being very conservative in this estimate; 2) the alterations will be made AT MOTOPORT'S COST!, and 3) The whole process will take 3-5 days.

There may be something more that you could ask for, but I really don't know what that might be.

An interesting sidenote is that we talked about putting a little leather where the Kevlar can be against the exhaust. Wayne carefully explained to me that the Kevlar actually has a higher melting point than the destruction temperature of the leather. It seems that every time I talk to him, I learn something.

Thanks, Wayne, Once Again.

Morning Commute

Wed, 12 Nov 2008 11:04:55 -0500

Just the UsualThis morning, I was thinking about how much I like commuting on my motorcycle, and what that requires in terms of attention.

I was able to avoid pieces of truck tire that came flying off the rear of a truck. Was it the driver's fault? I don't know, but the rest of the truck was an old piece of junk - the kind of truck you stay away from, because you think pieces of truck or what is in the back will come flying loose at any second. Not a pickup, either, but one of those larger trucks with the open wooden slats.

Yesterday, I turned onto Montgomery Street in San Francisco, just in time to have a skate boarder blast into the crosswalk against the light, and dead in front of me.

Yes, being vigilant helps. Yes, practicing evasive maneuvers helps. Yes, imagining everything that can possibly happen helps.

On the other hand, don't some of these motorists, skateboarders, and truck drivers have some responsibility toward us?

It really puts into focus the reason for a motorcycle lawyer to do what I do every day.

Scooters, Mopeds and Go Peds

Tue, 04 Nov 2008 11:37:56 -0500

Treatment Varies Under California LawAs we become ever more sensitive to miles per gallon, scooter sales have hit the roof. Mini dealerships seem to be everywhere, and the scooters themselves are all around congested cities.

Similarly, Mopeds and Go Peds are getting more use than ever before.

Of course, careless motorists are making u-turns in front of them, cutting them off by making left hand turns in front of them, and changing lanes into them.

Naturally, many of these riders are calling me for help.

One question that arises repeatedly is whether or not these vehicles are considered "motor vehicles" in California.

This is important, because of California's Proposition 213. For several years, it has been the law that an owner driving a vehicle must have insurance on the car involved in an accident. If they don't have insurance, they cannot get "non-economic" damages, primarily pain and suffering damages. Of course, this makes a huge difference.

In 1985, in a case called Farmer's Insurance Exchange v. Galvin, California's First District Court of Appeal held that a Moped is not a motor vehicle. Subsequently, the Vehicle Code was changed to distinguish between pedal driven motorized vehicles that can go over 30 mph, and those that cannot. The slower vehicles are not considered motor vehicles, can be operated by anyone over 16, and can use bike paths. The faster vehicles are treated as any other motor vehicle.

Scooters without seats, such as Go Peds, are also not considered motor vehicles, and the rules are similar.

Vespa type scooters are considered motor vehicles, and all the rules apply.

The DMV classifications are: A motorcycle is 150cc or more and is defined in Vehicle Code Section 400. A "motor driven cycle" is 149 cc or less, and includes small motorcycles and scooters as defined in Vehicle Code Section 405. Motorized bicycles, or Mopeds, can be fully driven using pedals, or if no pedals, electric powered under Vehicle Code 406(s)406(b). A motorized scooter, or Go Ped, is designed with a floorboard for standing under Vehicle Code Section 407.5.

Hopefully, this will help clarify the issue. As always, ride safely.

Professional Experts

Mon, 27 Oct 2008 11:09:30 -0500

Tiresome "Experts" Work Against Fellow RIdersI had a recent arbitration involving a motorcycle accident where the defense brought in one of their tired, old insurance defense motorcycle experts.

This self-proclaimed enthusiast is repeatedly disclosed by the defense on a wide range of claims, which usually amount to "attacking the victim". This particular load of mushroom fertilizer was the claim that a motorcyclist should have simply ridden around a car that pulled into traffic from a parking space, without looking.

Of course, the usual expert tricks initiated the testimony. Then it was time to test it.

Having done this work for years, I know that it is necessary to "see" an accident several ways: 1) As if looking from the top down, with the accident on a giant map; 2) From the view of each of the participants; and 3) From the viewpoint of actual witnesses, or what witnesses would have seen had their been any.

This case involved a relatively narrow roadway. Parking on both sides of the street. One lane each direction for traffic. At the time of the accident, there was an oncoming truck, so effectively, there was only one lane for the accident to occur in.

At the time of the accident, most of that lane was blocked. We know that, because the motorcycle went into the side of the car.

What the defense expert was trying to claim, was that a motorcycle could easily get around the car in the lane that was open.

What the defense expert did not know, was 1) Exactly where the car was when it pulled into traffic. Did it go back and forth in the parking space before it pulled out? Did it start the critical maneuver with part of the car in the street? How close was the motorcycle when the car pulled out? How fast did the car pull out? What was the angle? How much room was there between the parked car, and the vehicle in front of it when it pulled out?

In other words, the testimony was made up from speculation and conjecture. It depended for its effect on someone who does not like motorcycle riders for the trier of fact, in this case, the arbitrator.

We'll have to wait and see how this one comes out, but it always frosts me when a so-called motorcycle enthusiast uses his background to take out a fellow rider.

Why do they do it? Only one reason - money.

More on Rise in Motorcycle Deaths

Mon, 13 Oct 2008 11:26:36 -0400

No One Knows WhyI don't like to repeat a post, but I just again finished looking at the astounding number of deaths in Northern California among motorcycle riders.

While the CHP is emphasizing that the death rate is approaching what it was before mandatory helmets, the truth is that no one knows why the increase.

Some say older riders can't handle the faster bikes as they return to motorcycling after a few decades out of the sport.

Others blame new riders, who are trained to handle new bikes.

Another theory blames drives of automobiles, who can't seem to stop pulling out in front of motorcyclists, and changing lanes into them. Still others say that there are more motorcycles on the road, as people switch to the high mileage alternative offered by motorcycles.

Whatever the cause, this is a major, serious, problem. It may be one cause, it may be several, it may be all of the above. Certainly something needs to be done.

In the meantime, as riders we need to be ever more alert, more careful, and do whatever we can to reverse this deadly trend.