Massachusetts Bicycle Accident Lawyer

How bicycle accidents cases proceed under Massachusetts law

A person on a bicycle in Massachusetts is not a guest on the road. M.G.L. c. 85, sec. 11B gives every cyclist the right to use nearly every public way in the Commonwealth, except limited-access highways posted against bicycles, and it holds the cyclist to the same traffic laws and regulations as a driver: stop signs, red lights, yielding rules all apply the same way in Massachusetts as they do anywhere else. The statute also builds in a few bicycle-specific allowances, keeping right to pass a slower vehicle in the same lane, riding no more than two abreast, and a hand-signal duty that does not have to be continuous or given at all when both hands are needed to control the bike. Sidewalk riding is allowed outside business districts when necessary for safety, unless a the Commonwealth city or town's own ordinance says otherwise; an electric bicycle loses that allowance entirely under sec. 11B3/4, which bars sidewalk riding for an e-bike in terms.

The other half of a Massachusetts bicycle claim usually turns on what a driver owed the cyclist. M.G.L. c. 90, sec. 14 requires a driver passing a cyclist to leave a safe distance of not less than four feet, bars a driver who just passed a cyclist from turning right across their path unless it is safe to do so, requires a driver turning left to yield to an oncoming bicycle, and requires anyone opening a car door to first check that it is reasonably safe to do so without interfering with a passing cyclist. A violation of any of these is evidence of a the Commonwealth driver's negligence, not an automatic verdict. Helmets are required only for a cyclist sixteen years of age or younger under sec. 11B, and the same section goes further than most safety statutes: a helmet violation, or a violation of the child-passenger seating rule, cannot be used as evidence of contributory negligence in any civil action, so an insurer cannot lawfully use a missing helmet to reduce a claim.

Money in a Massachusetts bicycle claim runs through two separate tracks. A cyclist struck by a car reaches personal injury protection from the striking vehicle's policy under M.G.L. c. 90, sec. 34A, which pays up to eight thousand dollars regardless of fault. A claim for pain and suffering against the driver still has to clear the ordinary tort threshold in M.G.L. c. 231, sec. 6D, reasonable medical expenses over two thousand dollars, or an injury in one of the statute's listed categories. Fault is decided under Massachusetts's modified comparative negligence rule, M.G.L. c. 231, sec. 85: a the Commonwealth cyclist whose own share of fault is fifty percent or less still recovers, reduced by that share, and recovers nothing above it. A cyclist also has a reporting duty of their own: sec. 11B requires reporting a crash involving personal injury or more than one hundred dollars in property damage to the local police, and suit must be brought within three years under M.G.L. c. 260, sec. 2A.

Massachusetts statutes and case law

• M.G.L. c. 85, sec. 11B. Gives a cyclist the right to use nearly every public way, sets sidewalk-riding and two-abreast rules, requires a helmet only for a rider sixteen or younger, bars a helmet or child-passenger violation from being used as evidence of contributory negligence, and requires reporting a crash involving injury or more than $100 in property damage.
• M.G.L. c. 90, sec. 14. Requires a driver to pass a cyclist with at least four feet of clearance, bars an unsafe right turn across a cyclist just passed, requires yielding to an oncoming bicycle on a left turn, and requires checking for passing traffic, including cyclists, before opening a car door.
• M.G.L. c. 90, sec. 34A. Extends personal injury protection, up to eight thousand dollars, to a person struck by the insured's motor vehicle, regardless of fault, reached by a cyclist struck by a car.
• M.G.L. c. 231, sec. 6D. Bars a claim for pain and suffering in a motor vehicle case unless reasonable medical expenses exceed two thousand dollars or the injury is death, loss of a body member, permanent and serious disfigurement, a specified loss of sight or hearing, or a fracture.
• M.G.L. c. 231, sec. 85. Massachusetts's modified comparative-negligence rule: a cyclist whose own share of fault is fifty percent or less still recovers, reduced by that share, and recovers nothing above it.
• M.G.L. c. 260, sec. 2A. Sets the three-year deadline to bring a Massachusetts tort action, including a bicycle accident claim.

Common case patterns

1. A Massachusetts cyclist struck from behind by a driver who passed with less than four feet of clearance, a direct sec. 14 violation.
2. A the Commonwealth cyclist hit by a driver turning right immediately after passing, or by a left-turning driver who failed to yield to an oncoming bicycle.
3. A Massachusetts cyclist injured when a parked car's door opened into their path without the driver or passenger checking for passing traffic.
4. A Massachusetts cyclist sixteen or younger struck while not wearing a helmet, where the missing helmet cannot be used as evidence against the cyclist's own claim.
5. A the Commonwealth electric-bicycle rider struck by a car while riding on the road, governed by the same right-to-the-road and passing-distance rules as an ordinary cyclist.

Typical timeline

1. After a Massachusetts crash, the cyclist's own reporting duty under sec. 11B applies where there is personal injury or more than one hundred dollars in property damage, and treatment typically proceeds under the cyclist's own health coverage or the striking vehicle's PIP.
2. The PIP claim under sec. 34A, up to eight thousand dollars regardless of fault, is evaluated separately from the tort claim for pain and suffering against the the Commonwealth driver, which has to clear the sec. 6D threshold. Fault, including any helmet or passing-distance dispute, is weighed under the sec. 85 comparative-negligence standard.
3. Settlement or suit against the driver proceeds within the three-year window set by sec. 2A, with the driver's compliance with the four-foot passing rule, the turning rules, and the dooring duty in sec. 14 central to how fault is allocated in a Massachusetts case.

What can be recovered

• PIP benefits up to eight thousand dollars for medical expenses and a portion of lost wages, from the striking vehicle's policy regardless of fault, under sec. 34A.
• Additional medical expenses beyond the PIP layer.
• Lost income.
• Pain and suffering, once medical expenses exceed two thousand dollars or the injury falls into one of the categories listed in sec. 6D.
• A reduced but not barred recovery where the cyclist's own share of fault is fifty percent or less, under sec. 85.
• Full recovery unaffected by a missing helmet or a child-passenger-seat violation, which sec. 11B bars from being used as evidence of contributory negligence.

Key terms

PIP

Personal Injury Protection from the at-fault driver's auto policy, which pays a struck cyclist's first $8,000 of medical bills and lost wages regardless of fault.

Tort threshold

The $2,000 medical-bill or permanent-injury test under M.G.L. c. 231 sec. 6D that must be met to sue the at-fault driver for pain and suffering.

Dooring

A collision caused by a motorist opening a car door into a cyclist's path, addressed by M.G.L. c. 90 sec. 14.

Comparative negligence

Massachusetts' 50-percent-bar rule that reduces or bars recovery based on the cyclist's own share of fault.

Adult cyclist vs. cyclist 16 or younger

More questions

• Do I have to wear a helmet in Massachusetts, and can a missing helmet hurt my claim?

  Only riders sixteen and younger must wear a helmet under M.G.L. c. 85, sec. 11B. Adults are not required to wear one at all, and even for a rider who was required to, the statute states that a helmet violation cannot be used as evidence of contributory negligence in any civil action.

• How far does a car have to stay from a cyclist when passing in Massachusetts?

  Not less than four feet, at a reasonable and proper speed, under M.G.L. c. 90, sec. 14. A pass closer than four feet is evidence that the driver was negligent if a crash results.

• Who is at fault when a parked car's door hits a cyclist?

  M.G.L. c. 90, sec. 14 puts the duty on the person opening the door: no one may open a car door unless it is reasonably safe to do so without interfering with other traffic, including cyclists. A door opened without checking is evidence of negligence in the resulting claim.

• If I was partly at fault for my Massachusetts bike crash, can I still recover anything?

  Often yes. Massachusetts uses modified comparative negligence with a fifty-percent bar under M.G.L. c. 231, sec. 85. If a cyclist's share of the fault is fifty percent or less, they can still recover, reduced by that percentage; at more than fifty percent, they recover nothing.

• Is it legal to ride an electric bicycle on the sidewalk in Massachusetts?

  No. M.G.L. c. 85, sec. 11B3/4 gives an e-bike rider the same rights and duties as an ordinary cyclist under sec. 11B, but it reverses the sidewalk allowance in terms: an electric bicycle may not be ridden on a sidewalk at all, with no business-district qualification and no safety exception.