Paralyzed Bicyclist Sues City, Saying Lakefront Trail Dropped Nine Feet - The Chainlink2024-03-28T22:09:03Zhttps://thechainlink.org/forum/topics/paralyzed-bicyclist-sues-city-saying-lakefront-trail-dropped-nine?commentId=2211490%3AComment%3A879412&x=1&feed=yes&xn_auth=noI rode the Chicago Ave sidewa…tag:thechainlink.org,2015-01-09:2211490:Comment:8794122015-01-09T08:36:05.753ZShawn Evanshttps://thechainlink.org/profile/ShawnEvans
<p>I rode the Chicago Ave sidewalk on the bridge and encountered the same 3 step drop.</p>
<p>So I stopped my bike and walked down.</p>
<p>When will people get the message 'speed kills'?</p>
<p>As for this unfortunate case, Jennifer doesn't state where she entered the path atop the breakwater wall. Her video petition said 'the path has no other obstacles or drop-offs for 1.1 miles before this point', so I can only assume she got on at 43rd St which, like 37th St, has a dangerous…</p>
<p>I rode the Chicago Ave sidewalk on the bridge and encountered the same 3 step drop.</p>
<p>So I stopped my bike and walked down.</p>
<p>When will people get the message 'speed kills'?</p>
<p>As for this unfortunate case, Jennifer doesn't state where she entered the path atop the breakwater wall. Her video petition said 'the path has no other obstacles or drop-offs for 1.1 miles before this point', so I can only assume she got on at 43rd St which, like 37th St, has a dangerous drop-off.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=z_TxFLyaQTdY.k6k_xBca1w6I" target="_blank">https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=z_TxFLyaQTdY.k6k_xBca1w6I</a></p>
<p>Seems to me all the lawyer for the city has to ask is, if you got on at a point where the breakwater path has a dangerous drop-off, shouldn't you have reasonably expected it to end the same way? Forewarned is forearmed.<br/> <br/> <cite>Mike Zumwalt said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.thechainlink.org/forum/topics/paralyzed-bicyclist-sues-city-saying-lakefront-trail-dropped-nine?id=2211490%3ATopic%3A877526&page=2#2211490Comment877618"><div><div class="xg_user_generated"><p>My own brush with OMG I almost hurt myself was riding East on Chicago ave. I hate the bridges that are open grates because of the slippery tire movement so I went up on the sidewalk.</p>
<p>OOOOPS! the other side of the walk past the bridge is 3 steps, luckily I was on my Mt. Bike and improvised very fast and rode down the steps. WHEW!</p>
<p>Now had I been riding fixed I'd be layed up somewhere eating through a tube.</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote> Agreed. It's always worth get…tag:thechainlink.org,2015-01-08:2211490:Comment:8793082015-01-08T18:38:12.326ZAnne Althttps://thechainlink.org/profile/Anne91
<p>Agreed. It's always worth getting an opinion if you think there's any chance that you may have a case. For those who aren't familiar with how personal injury cases work, the standard practice is that these cases are on a contingency basis, based on whatever the lawyer collects for you - no retainer or hourly billing. Calling to get a professional opinion and see if you may have a valid claim costs you nothing.<br></br> <br></br> <cite>ad said:</cite></p>
<div><p><em>If you get in an accident…</em></p>
</div>
<p>Agreed. It's always worth getting an opinion if you think there's any chance that you may have a case. For those who aren't familiar with how personal injury cases work, the standard practice is that these cases are on a contingency basis, based on whatever the lawyer collects for you - no retainer or hourly billing. Calling to get a professional opinion and see if you may have a valid claim costs you nothing.<br/> <br/> <cite>ad said:</cite></p>
<div><p><em>If you get in an accident yourself, don't play armchair lawyer and think you have no recourse because of what has been said about Boub here, REACH OUT to a lawyer and talk to him or her regarding what happened. A qualified/respected personal injury attorney will be honest and let you know whether they think you have a case---it's how they make their living. It's important to understand the Boub decision and discuss it here, at a minimum so that people know why to push the legislature to fix it, but don't just assume it forecloses a claim when you get in an accident somewhere. Let a qualified legal professional help you figure that out. </em></p>
<p></p>
</div> .....just a quick disclaimer…tag:thechainlink.org,2015-01-08:2211490:Comment:8789652015-01-08T17:07:02.789Zadhttps://thechainlink.org/profile/AdrianRohrer
<p><br></br> .....just a quick disclaimer for anyone actively paying attention to this thread, and not because I disagree with Anne's analysis, but because not everyone is as familiar with the ins-and-outs of the decision as some are on here, and I think what I say below is important to keep in mind regardless...... </p>
<p>If you get in an accident yourself, don't play armchair lawyer and think you have no recourse because of what has been said about <em>Boub </em>here, REACH OUT to a lawyer and…</p>
<p><br/> .....just a quick disclaimer for anyone actively paying attention to this thread, and not because I disagree with Anne's analysis, but because not everyone is as familiar with the ins-and-outs of the decision as some are on here, and I think what I say below is important to keep in mind regardless...... </p>
<p>If you get in an accident yourself, don't play armchair lawyer and think you have no recourse because of what has been said about <em>Boub </em>here, REACH OUT to a lawyer and talk to him or her regarding what happened. A qualified/respected personal injury attorney will be honest and let you know whether they think you have a case---it's how they make their living. It's important to understand the <em>Boub</em> decision<em> </em>and discuss it here, at a minimum so that people know why to push the legislature to fix it, but don't just assume it forecloses a claim when you get in an accident somewhere. Let a qualified legal professional help you figure that out. </p>
<p></p>
<p><br/> <cite>Anne Alt said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.thechainlink.org/forum/topics/paralyzed-bicyclist-sues-city-saying-lakefront-trail-dropped-nine?page=4&commentId=2211490%3AComment%3A879292&x=1#2211490Comment879292"><div><div class="xg_user_generated"><p>FYI - The distinguishing characteristic for roadways where cyclists are considered intended users is whether the roads are <em>designated in any way as bike routes</em>, something that is not the case on Kingsbury. If there were bike route signs or bike lanes on a road, that's a different ballgame.<br/><br/>The location in Wilmette where I was injured was a known, much-reported hazard but it was not on a designated bike route, so I was out of luck - permitted but not intended.<br/> <br/> <cite>ad said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.thechainlink.org/forum/topics/paralyzed-bicyclist-sues-city-saying-lakefront-trail-dropped-nine?page=4&commentId=2211490%3AComment%3A879288&x=1#2211490Comment878813"><div><p><br/> ... I am one of several cyclists who was severally injured before the City finally took out the train tracks on Kingsbury---something that would have happened much earlier if <em>Boub </em>wasn't on the books and the City had to deal with suits from all of the cyclists injured by a dangerous road condition the City had clear knowledge of. </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote> FYI - The distinguishing char…tag:thechainlink.org,2015-01-08:2211490:Comment:8792922015-01-08T15:45:10.517ZAnne Althttps://thechainlink.org/profile/Anne91
<p>FYI - The distinguishing characteristic for roadways where cyclists are considered intended users is whether the roads are <em>designated in any way as bike routes</em>, something that is not the case on Kingsbury. If there were bike route signs or bike lanes on a road, that's a different ballgame.<br></br><br></br>The location in Wilmette where I was injured was a known, much-reported hazard but it was not on a designated bike route, so I was out of luck - permitted but not intended.<br></br> …<br></br></p>
<p>FYI - The distinguishing characteristic for roadways where cyclists are considered intended users is whether the roads are <em>designated in any way as bike routes</em>, something that is not the case on Kingsbury. If there were bike route signs or bike lanes on a road, that's a different ballgame.<br/><br/>The location in Wilmette where I was injured was a known, much-reported hazard but it was not on a designated bike route, so I was out of luck - permitted but not intended.<br/> <br/> <cite>ad said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.thechainlink.org/forum/topics/paralyzed-bicyclist-sues-city-saying-lakefront-trail-dropped-nine?page=4&commentId=2211490%3AComment%3A879288&x=1#2211490Comment878813"><div><p><br/> ... I am one of several cyclists who was severally injured before the City finally took out the train tracks on Kingsbury---something that would have happened much earlier if <em>Boub </em>wasn't on the books and the City had to deal with suits from all of the cyclists injured by a dangerous road condition the City had clear knowledge of. </p>
</div>
</blockquote> Quite possibly, but I think t…tag:thechainlink.org,2015-01-08:2211490:Comment:8789622015-01-08T15:44:07.258ZSkip Montanaro 0mihttps://thechainlink.org/profile/SkipMontanaro92
<p>Quite possibly, but I think the need and value needs to be demonstrated first before a more formal organization might be convinced to take it on.</p>
<p>I created a <a href="http://www.thechainlink.org/forum/topics/building-a-list-database-of-problems" target="_blank">new thread for the topic</a>. Let's move discussion there so as to make it more widely visible and not swamp this thread.</p>
<p></p>
<p><cite>Nikul Shah said:…</cite></p>
<p>Quite possibly, but I think the need and value needs to be demonstrated first before a more formal organization might be convinced to take it on.</p>
<p>I created a <a href="http://www.thechainlink.org/forum/topics/building-a-list-database-of-problems" target="_blank">new thread for the topic</a>. Let's move discussion there so as to make it more widely visible and not swamp this thread.</p>
<p></p>
<p><cite>Nikul Shah said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.thechainlink.org/forum/topics/paralyzed-bicyclist-sues-city-saying-lakefront-trail-dropped-nine?xg_source=msg_com_forum&id=2211490%3ATopic%3A877526&page=4#2211490Comment879096"><div><div class="xg_user_generated"><p>Seems like something Active Transport Alliance may be best suited to do? Would they have any interest in taking the lead on a hazard list?</p>
<p><br/> <cite>Skip Montanaro 12mi said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.thechainlink.org/forum/topics/paralyzed-bicyclist-sues-city-saying-lakefront-trail-dropped-nine?page=4&commentId=2211490%3AComment%3A879062&x=1#2211490Comment878772"><div><div class="xg_user_generated"><p>I have a suggestion. I don't see there's much we can do about making certain road segments "permitted and intended" where today they are only "permitted", but we could do something about the "on notice" part. We could maintain a page on thechainlink.org which calls out known hazards and periodically email (and print+USPS mail?) it to appropriate city officials.</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote> I saw this and initially thou…tag:thechainlink.org,2015-01-08:2211490:Comment:8792882015-01-08T15:27:58.285ZTim Shttps://thechainlink.org/profile/TimShambrook
<p>I saw this and initially thought woah what the hell damn you city then I actually looked at the location and thought woah talk about a tragic but avoidable accident. This is a break wall, not a road. This is unfortunate but she was the negligent party. To litter up the lakefront with a slew of signs because someone was not being attentive is ridiculous. </p>
<p></p>
<p>Do they have signs on the edge of roof tops, or the Grand Canyon? I feel for her but to get all up on negligent design when…</p>
<p>I saw this and initially thought woah what the hell damn you city then I actually looked at the location and thought woah talk about a tragic but avoidable accident. This is a break wall, not a road. This is unfortunate but she was the negligent party. To litter up the lakefront with a slew of signs because someone was not being attentive is ridiculous. </p>
<p></p>
<p>Do they have signs on the edge of roof tops, or the Grand Canyon? I feel for her but to get all up on negligent design when this is the first time someone has done this is nothing more than a PR gambit to force the cities hand. </p>
<p></p>
<p>This is completely different than the Train Track issue you are talking about ad, completely. There is a reasonable expectation of safe passage along a right of way like a street. While the train tracks are obvious and I never had trouble transiting them I can understand how it could cause issues. A massive/obvious break in a break wall that is not a ROW is so not any where near the same thing. </p> I have a suggestion. I don't…tag:thechainlink.org,2015-01-07:2211490:Comment:8787722015-01-07T17:11:11.796ZSkip Montanaro 0mihttps://thechainlink.org/profile/SkipMontanaro92
<p>I have a suggestion. I don't see there's much we can do about making certain road segments "permitted and intended" where today they are only "permitted", but we could do something about the "on notice" part. We could maintain a page on thechainlink.org which calls out known hazards and periodically email (and print+USPS mail?) it to appropriate city officials.</p>
<p>That said, I think a forum thread would be a horrendous way to maintain such information. There would be no easy way to…</p>
<p>I have a suggestion. I don't see there's much we can do about making certain road segments "permitted and intended" where today they are only "permitted", but we could do something about the "on notice" part. We could maintain a page on thechainlink.org which calls out known hazards and periodically email (and print+USPS mail?) it to appropriate city officials.</p>
<p>That said, I think a forum thread would be a horrendous way to maintain such information. There would be no easy way to remove resolved problems, and the data would be strewn all around throughout the thread. Maybe have a thread to discuss additions/deletions and one or more tabular type pages (one per neighborhood? One for the entire City of Chicago? What about suburbs?) which contain the actual problem data.</p> Myself as well, actually. I…tag:thechainlink.org,2015-01-07:2211490:Comment:8788132015-01-07T16:36:32.573Zadhttps://thechainlink.org/profile/AdrianRohrer
<p><br></br> Myself as well, actually. I am one of several cyclists who was severally injured before the City finally took out the train tracks on Kingsbury---something that would have happened much earlier if <em>Boub </em>wasn't on the books and the City had to deal with suits from all of the cyclists injured by a dangerous road condition the City had clear knowledge of. The business owner that helped me and held on to my bike while I went to the hospital said an accident occurred on Kingsbury…</p>
<p><br/> Myself as well, actually. I am one of several cyclists who was severally injured before the City finally took out the train tracks on Kingsbury---something that would have happened much earlier if <em>Boub </em>wasn't on the books and the City had to deal with suits from all of the cyclists injured by a dangerous road condition the City had clear knowledge of. The business owner that helped me and held on to my bike while I went to the hospital said an accident occurred on Kingsbury almost weekly. The City, however, refused to fix the situation for years---arguably because it couldn't face liability under <em>Boub</em>.</p>
<p></p>
<p>The above is just one example of how PI suits can be used to cause change to come about quicker---at least when the system hasn't placed a restriction like <em>Boub</em> on otherwise clear liability. </p>
<p></p>
<p>David's bridge example also highlights how silly <em>Boub </em>is in practice, as in that case the cyclist had to use a sidewalk (which they are actually not permitted to use by law) to avoid a danger in the public right-of-way the law/City clearly "intends" the cyclist to use, no matter what our Supreme Court has said on the issue. That's likely an argument for a different forum than this, unfortunately.</p>
<p> <br/> <cite>Anne Alt said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.thechainlink.org/forum/topics/paralyzed-bicyclist-sues-city-saying-lakefront-trail-dropped-nine?page=3&commentId=2211490%3AComment%3A878728&x=1#2211490Comment878812"><div><div class="xg_user_generated"><p>A lot of people (including me) have gotten screwed by the precedent set by the <em>Boub</em> decision after crashes caused by metal grate bridge decks, potholes and other road defects.<br/> <br/> <cite>David Barish said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.thechainlink.org/forum/topics/paralyzed-bicyclist-sues-city-saying-lakefront-trail-dropped-nine?page=3&commentId=2211490%3AComment%3A878763&x=1#2211490Comment878763"><div><p><br/> This is an interesting point. the difference between a permitted and intended user was the reason why the Plaintiff in Boub v. Township of Wayne (well discussed here by Brendan <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.mybikeadvocate.com/2009/09/when-may-public-entity-be-held-liable.html" target="_blank">http://www.mybikeadvocate.com/2009/09/when-may-public-entity-be-hel...</a>)</p>
<p>denied compensation to a seriously injured rider on a public road because he was not deemed an intended user of the road.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote> A lot of people (including me…tag:thechainlink.org,2015-01-07:2211490:Comment:8788122015-01-07T16:18:09.027ZAnne Althttps://thechainlink.org/profile/Anne91
<p>A lot of people (including me) have gotten screwed by the precedent set by the <em>Boub</em> decision after crashes caused by metal grate bridge decks, potholes and other road defects.<br></br> <br></br> <cite>David Barish said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.thechainlink.org/forum/topics/paralyzed-bicyclist-sues-city-saying-lakefront-trail-dropped-nine?page=3&commentId=2211490%3AComment%3A878763&x=1#2211490Comment878763"><div><p><br></br> This is an interesting point. the difference…</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>A lot of people (including me) have gotten screwed by the precedent set by the <em>Boub</em> decision after crashes caused by metal grate bridge decks, potholes and other road defects.<br/> <br/> <cite>David Barish said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.thechainlink.org/forum/topics/paralyzed-bicyclist-sues-city-saying-lakefront-trail-dropped-nine?page=3&commentId=2211490%3AComment%3A878763&x=1#2211490Comment878763"><div><p><br/> This is an interesting point. the difference between a permitted and intended user was the reason why the Plaintiff in Boub v. Township of Wayne (well discussed here by Brendan <a href="http://www.mybikeadvocate.com/2009/09/when-may-public-entity-be-held-liable.html" target="_blank">http://www.mybikeadvocate.com/2009/09/when-may-public-entity-be-hel...</a>)</p>
<p>denied compensation to a seriously injured rider on a public road because he was not deemed an intended user of the road.</p>
</div>
</blockquote> This is an interesting point…tag:thechainlink.org,2015-01-07:2211490:Comment:8787632015-01-07T16:14:15.604ZDavid Barishhttps://thechainlink.org/profile/DavidBarish
<p><br></br> This is an interesting point. the difference between a permitted and intended user was the reason why the Plaintiff in Boub v. Township of Wayne (well discussed here by Brendan <a href="http://www.mybikeadvocate.com/2009/09/when-may-public-entity-be-held-liable.html" target="_blank">http://www.mybikeadvocate.com/2009/09/when-may-public-entity-be-held-liable.html</a>)</p>
<p>denied compensation to a seriously injured rider on a public road because he was not deemed an intended user of…</p>
<p><br/> This is an interesting point. the difference between a permitted and intended user was the reason why the Plaintiff in Boub v. Township of Wayne (well discussed here by Brendan <a href="http://www.mybikeadvocate.com/2009/09/when-may-public-entity-be-held-liable.html" target="_blank">http://www.mybikeadvocate.com/2009/09/when-may-public-entity-be-held-liable.html</a>)</p>
<p>denied compensation to a seriously injured rider on a public road because he was not deemed an intended user of the road. I recall riding on the Wells St. Bridge before they installed the bike lane and plate with a friend. The friend would always go onto the sidewalk over the bridge telling me he was using the "intended user" route. He feared sliding on the grates of the bridge and his widow being poor. As such he decided to take the "safe" route on the sidewalk. Who amongst us has not gotten lost biking or hiking on a trail and taken a seeming offshoot that leads nowhere or in this case worse? I will not comment on the behavior of the cyclist or the liability of the Park District and will leave that to the parties. Regardless of the litigation "no bikes" signs at the point where these offshoots leave the main path are an inexpensive and good idea.<br/> <cite>ad said:</cite></p>
<blockquote cite="http://www.thechainlink.org/forum/topics/paralyzed-bicyclist-sues-city-saying-lakefront-trail-dropped-nine?page=3&commentId=2211490%3AComment%3A878629&x=1#2211490Comment878629"><p>...She's probably going to have a big hurdle to overcome---as she was likely a permitted, but not intended, user of this path (I say likely permitted because I haven't seen anything to suggest the park district has a standing rule banning cyclists from riding on paths outside of the Lakefront Trail, but maybe there is something out there rule-wise). And a court may not even have to get to that analysis if the park district convinces a court the danger was open and obvious. </p>
<p>Best of luck to her in the ongoing recovery.</p>
</blockquote>