CALL 916-777-7777
Youtube Facebook-f X-twitter Linkedin-in

California Passes Law Legalizing Lane Splitting

Posted on behalf of Arnold Law Firm in

A new traffic law passed in California that legalizes lane splitting will go into effect on Jan. 1, 2017. Lane splitting is a maneuver practiced by motorcyclists where the rider travels between two lanes of vehicles, usually during stand-still traffic.

California is the only state in the U.S. to allow lane splitting. The U.S. Department of Transportation views the driving practice as an escape route and a way for motorcyclists to avoid being rear-ended or trapped by other vehicles.

The new law states that California Highway Patrol (CHP) is allowed to create guidelines or suggestions of when lane splitting will be allowed based on the nature of the surrounding traffic.

Some of these suggestions include:

  • Motorcyclists should not drive more than 10 miles per hour faster than the flow of surrounding traffic.
  • Motorcyclists should not split lanes while traveling faster than 30 miles per hour.
  • Motorcyclists should not split lanes at merge points.
  • Motorcyclists should watch out for cars approaching in the distance.

While these guidelines were created by the CHP, they are only suggestions and motorcyclists cannot be issued a ticket for not following them.

However, drivers in cars and other vehicles traveling alongside a motorcycle can be issued a ticket for moving into the motorcyclists’ path to impede on their attempt to share the lane. CHP will consider this a violation of a lane change and will penalize the driver.

Although it is now considered a legal driving practice, lane splitting has been criticized by driving experts for causing safety concerns. Motorcyclists who engage in lane splitting have a higher chance of rear-ending vehicles as opposed to those who ride inside the lane.

Motorcyclists engaged in lane splitting are also more susceptible to being in an accident during weekdays, due to the high volume of traffic buildup during peak rush hours. Broadside accidents are also a concern as drivers in cars and other vehicles attempt to switch lanes without checking or failing to see an approaching motorcycle.

These dangers have led many to blame a recent increase in fatal motorcycle accidents on the practice of lane splitting. According to a report from the California’s Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System released in early 2016, motorcycle accident fatalities have increased 23 percent since 2010.

CHP and other California officials are warning drivers to look twice and check for motorcyclists approaching in their lane. It is up to motorcyclists to decide when lane splitting is appropriate and safe to attempt.

While lane splitting is now legal, motorcyclists are still in danger of being injured in an accident. If you or someone you love is a motorcyclist who has been in an accident caused by another driver’s negligence, you may be able to file a claim.

Contact a Sacramento motorcycle accident attorneys for a free consultation to discuss if your accident entitles compensation. We will not charge you any fees unless you receive a positive outcome in your case.

Call a personal injury lawyer from Arnold Law Firm today at (916) 777-7777 to speak with an attorney after being in a motorcycle accident.

Settlement - $3,767,000

Truck Accident

A 20-year-old man who had been married for just 12 days left home on his way to work. He was driving on Pleasant Grove Road in Sutter County in the early morning when he came upon a slow-moving truck. As he pulled out to pass the truck, the truck driver turned left in front of him. The young man attempted to steer back into his lane but his vehicle struck an un-flagged piece of metal extending from the back of the truck. He died in the resulting crash.

Expert witnesses brought in by the Arnold Law Firm proved that the truck, owned and operated by a hauling firm, should never have been on the highway that morning. Specifically, the rear and side turn signals did not work and the rear-view mirror was in a poor state of adjustment at the time of the collision. As a result, the driver, who had failed to properly inspect the vehicle before setting out that morning, couldn’t see the young man’s vehicle as it attempted to pass.

The poor condition of the truck, its lack of maintenance and the manner in which it was operated were found to be substantial factors in causing the collision that killed the young man. The testimony also established that the man had been making a lawful pass at the lawful speed limit and acted reasonably when he attempted to avoid the collision.

The man’s 20-year-old widow was awarded $3,767,000.77, his parents were awarded $185,131 and the family was reimbursed $11,899 in funeral expenses. Though money is a poor substitute for a young man’s life, this verdict demonstrates that drivers who endanger the lives of others will be held accountable for their actions.