Walk This Way

Cross walks were invented for a reason: If you are a pedestrian, take advantage of the “right of way” legal status you hold when properly crossing in a cross walk otherwise you may recover no compensation for what often times are serious injuries even if the car that hit you was also negligent. Why would you place your trust that a complete stranger will: (1) see you in time; and (2) slow down or stop to avoid hitting you as you cross the street? If you are one of those people who truly believes that the world revolves around you and that your mere presence in public should cause all traffic to stop in awe of your majesty and glory, than you are probably in for a rude awakening.

You should cross at a properly designated cross-walk. If the cross walk has a pedestrian signal device you should start your cross when the pedestrian signal indicates it is appropriate to do so [i.e. white “walk” or walking person illuminated] and with enough time to do so safely. If the cross walk does not have a pedestrian signal device but the intersection is controlled by traffic lights, you should be mindful of whether the road you are crossing has a red, yellow or green light and only cross when oncoming traffic in both ways is stopped for a red light. You should regardless of right of way always look both ways [i.e. at a minimum looking left, right and left again]. Many of us remember this last instruction from when we were kids and painfully reminded by our parents, aunts, uncles, grandparents or older siblings when we didn’t follow this rule.

Most people, yours truly included in that group before he became a lawyer, don’t appreciate the risks and sometimes catastrophic consequences we place ourselves in when we cross a road at some middle point and don’t use a cross walk. Pedestrian versus car or truck accidents can and often times do result in serious long term injuries. When you take a human body and place it in front of a car or truck traveling at even slow speeds the odds of walking away with little or no injury is very low. We all do it; it is for convenience sake right? Why walk the extra 50 or 100 feet to the intersection cross walk when all you have to do is cross and no traffic is coming anyways.

Next time you do that, all I ask is that you pause and think [not in the road either]: Are the benefits worth the potential risk you are about to assume by crossing at an undesignated part of the road? What are the benefits? Convenience mainly; being in a hurry; too lazy to walk a little bit further; I looked both ways and I have time to cross before those cars down the road come close enough; I don’t see any cars so nothing is going to happen to me anyways right?

What are the risks? To name a few: Death, catastrophic and permanent injuries which can include severe brain damage, coma, fractured skull & bones, spine injuries, loss of use of your arms & legs, and permanent disfigurement. This doesn’t include the out of pocket costs to you from medical bills for treatment to lost income because you were not able to work which carry less visible but just as real injuries impacting your life. How are you going to pay rent or a mortgage if you can’t work? What burden have you placed not only on yourself but on loved ones that become your care takers? What plans or goals in life did you have before that now take on a complete new meaning? Who is going to pay for all this?

Most states follow what is called “comparative” negligence, which means that degrees of negligence are taken into consideration and even if a plaintiff is shown to have comparative fault for his or her own injuries, they are still allowed some recovery reduced by the percentage of fault attributed to their actions. For example, if as a pedestrian you are found to be 25% at fault for the accident, than any award for compensation entered for you would be reduced by that 25% where the other negligent party was 75% at fault.

Maryland and D.C. however are still two of only 5 states that are still stuck in the 19th century and follow what is called “contributory” negligence. This means that if you contributed at all, even just 1% to your own injuries, you may be forever barred from collecting any compensation even if the vehicle that struck you was 99% negligent. This is a harsh result, and especially in pedestrian accidents where someone died or suffered severe injuries. There have been and currently are calls from the Maryland Trial Lawyers Association, among others, to our legislators to change this absurd law. It is a very sad part of what lawyers like myself hear all too often about when the family of the injured call us looking for some hope and answers. You can’t always avoid the risk that you will be struck by a car or truck when you are walking across the street, but an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.