Personal Injury Lawyer

The personal injury lawyers at Rahman Law PC are powerful advocates for people who have been injured through no fault of their own.  These personal injury blogs contain articles with information relating to personal injury law, personal injury lawyers, and personal injury cases of interest.

Assembly Bill 819 to Aid Bikeway Developments

Posted on by Rahman Law PC

For those unfamiliar with it, Assembly Bill 819 is the important new bill that would give California cities a significant boost towards advancing bikeway designs and renovations. Introduced in February 2011, the bill aims to “amend Section 890.4 of the Streets and Highways Code, relating to bikeways.” The bill’s opening statement is as follows:


“Existing law requires the Department of Transportation, in cooperation with county and city governments, to establish minimum safety design criteria for the planning and construction of bikeways, and authorizes cities, counties, and local agencies to establish bikeways

[…]

This bill would include a class IV bikeway among the bikeways subject to the above provisions and would define a class IV bikeway to include a segregated bike lane which provides exclusive use of bicycles on streets, as specified.” [1]

How would AB 819 change current bikeway advocacy plans?
Around this time last year, select San Francisco streets were newly painted with green bike boxes. The effort and lobbying put into implementing these boxes are often ignored, but it is important to acknowledge that just these 7 boxes took a year to complete. [4, 5]
Such delays in development are caused by current state laws and Caltrans guidelines, which dictate what and how new bikeways are created. And “under current state law, facilities like protected bike lanes and bike boxes–which are not established within Caltrans guidelines–must go through an expensive and time-consuming approval process.” [2]
Meanwhile, AB 819 would allow planners to “use guidelines that have been established outside Caltrans, like the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, which includes designs for protected bikeways.” Such guidelines have allowed cities like New York, Chicago, and DC to develop protected bikeways with greater ease, efficiency, and therefore success than those in San Francisco. [3]
Current status of AB 819
Last Monday, the State Assemble Transportation Committee passed AB 819, but with crucial corrections. The amended bill “would only require Caltrans to create an experimentation process through which engineers can establish bikeway standards” [3] before making any real and effective changes to bike lanes and bikeways.
Though a step forward, it is still not the greenlight the California Bicycle Coalition and other advocacy groups have been waiting for. Despite such setbacks CBC Communications Director Jim Brown says, “We’re continuing to work with Caltrans to figure out how innovative bikeway designs already used in other parts of the U.S. and Europe can be implemented in California.” [3]
Sources:

Shaana Rahman and S.F. StreetsBlog on Criminal Charges for Drivers Who Kill Pedestrians

Posted on by Shaana A. Rahman

In Tuesday’s StreetsBlog Post, “Will DA Gascón Reform the Double Standard for Drivers Who Kill?“, our very own Shaana Rahman was interviewed for her thoughts and experience on the matter of charging drivers and bicyclists who kill pedestrians as criminal offenders:

Shaana Rahman, a lawyer who represents victims of traffic crashes in civil court, explained that injuring or killing a pedestrian due to negligence has traditionally been categorized as a civil offense rather than a criminal offense, which requires “intent to harm.”
 
“What I have seen in my practice is unless there’s an issue where a driver or cyclist is under the influence of drugs or alcohol or driving recklessly and willfully, such as drag racing or something of that nature, by and large there are no criminal charges filed against folks who injure other people in those situations,” she said. Regarding the criminal charges against Ang, she added, “In this situation, with this particular bicyclist where you don’t have those aggravating circumstances, it seemed unusual to me.”
This recent decision to charge bicyclist Randolph Ang for the death of pedestrian Dionette Cherney has been met with both support and criticism. Support for breaking from the established tradition of DA inaction against pedestrian deaths by drivers and criticism for beginning this tide change with this year’s one bicyclist-caused death betwixt 12 driver-caused deaths.
But the most important question to consider is the one raised by Streetsblog: “Is Gascón getting serious about driver recklessness and negligence?” As quoted in the article, Ms. Rahman believes this could indicate “a fundamental shift in the punishment aspect of drivers who, in all other circumstances, would be seen as negligent drivers.”

“Criminal charges are important to deter certain behavior,” she said, and with so many cases of negligent drivers who kill or injure other people, “he’s going to have his hands full.”

If you ever need a pedestrian accident attorney in San Francisco, Paso Robles, or the surrounding Central California Coast area, contact us for a free consultation.

Shaana Rahman & KGO Radio on Embarcadero Collision

Posted on by Shaana A. Rahman

For those who missed it, Shaana Rahman spoke to KGO this past Tuesday afternoon regarding the District Attorney’s decision on Monday to charge Randolph Ang, the cyclist involved in the fatal collision with pedestrian Dionette Cherney, with misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter. The collision occurred on July 15th, 2011 on Embarcadero and Mission and resulted in Ms. Cherney’s death after the 68-year-old tourist received “blunt force injuries to the head” from being knocked to the pavement. On Monday, Assistant D.A. Omid Talai announced that Mr. Ang would be arraigned on November 23rd to carry out his one-year sentence in county jail.*

Reactions to Mr. Ang’s sentence have ranged from cries of too little to too much. Fast forward to 43:52 to hear Ms. Rahman’s speak on this tragic accident. What are your thoughts?
Audio Clip Courtesy of KGO Radio

The Tour de Fat is Back!

Posted on by Rahman Law PC


Grab your bike and get ready to party. Because this year’s Tour de Fat is gonna be next Saturday the 24th at Linley Meadow in Golden Gate Park, from 10am to 5pm.

Organized by member-volunteers over at the SF Bike Coalition, the Tour de Fat is a free and open celebration for everyone of all ages. This year’s entertainment features live music, face painting, and silk screening. On top of the fun will be the conventional bike parade, as well as the slightly-less-conventional fire-jumping bike show.
And finally, if a rodeo-circus isn’t your cup of tea, remember that there will be plenty of good food and beer for sale in the park as well, with all proceeds going to the SFBC and The Bay Area Ridge Trail Council!
For event details, visit the SFBC website at http://www.sfbike.org/?fat

Berkeley Police Work to Improve Motorcycle Safety

Posted on by Shaana A. Rahman

A couple of weeks ago, officers of the Berkeley Police Department were stationed throughout the city on streets with the highest rate of motorcycle accidents.

This operation came out of the growing issue of motorcycle fatalities in California. A CBS San Francisco article said that data has shown the causes of these accidents to be mostly:
  • Speeding
  • Unsafe turning
  • Driving under the influence
  • Inexperienced riding
If these are the causes of accidents, it would seem that police vigilance is not going to be the cure-all to our problem. Instead, the best way to decrease dangerous riding might be to improve the manner in which all motorists are driving out on the road. For motorcyclists, rider training is readily available to refresh your memory of the rules of the road. Such training is offered through the California Motorcyclist Safety Program, which can be contacted by visiting www.CA-msp.org.
The police may be able to catch and charge unsafe drivers and motorcyclists, but they can only address half the issue at hand with tickets and fines. It’s the motorists that will need to take on the challenge of safely sharing the road.

Sharing the Road Means Sharing the Air

Posted on by Shaana A. Rahman

A recent study done by Canadian scientists from Health Canada, Environment Canada, and University of Ottawa warns cyclists of the health risks they take when riding in the streets.

Now, they’re not just talking about the everyday fear of being struck by a car, but specifically, the study shows that car pollution and tailpipe exhaust can cause heart problems in cyclists who share the road–and subsequently, the air.
In this study, the scientists attached heart monitors to 42 healthy, nonsmoking cyclists to measure their heart rates before, during, and after their cycling. They also attached air pollution-detecting instruments to their bicycles and assigned some to congested and others to uncongested roads.
It was discovered that those who traversed the more congested roads had a lower heart rate variability after their ride. Heart rate variability, as described in the SF Chronicle article about this study, is a way to indicate how efficiently the heart can respond to stresses like exercising. The heart of a person with a lower heart rate variability has a harder time responding than the heart of a person with a higher heart rate variability.
What is it about congested roads that make the air so toxic? According to the SF Chronicle again, the fine particles of pollution that escape through tailpipes are “small enough to lodge deep in the lungs. Tiny particles can also cross the blood-brain barrier, potentially harming the nervous system.” And the cars that are known to emit the most of these toxic particles are diesel buses and trucks.
So now that you are properly worried for your health, keep in mind some simple advice from these scientists: (1) Keep farther away from tailpipes, as the the small particles clump together the further they get away from the car, making them too large to lodge deeply in your lungs; (2) Avoid streets with heavy traffic.
While this advice might seem trivial, it is the common sense of it all that will keep you safe.


Ford to Leave Muni at the End of June

Posted on by Rahman Law PC
At the end of this month, Nathaniel Ford will be leaving his post as the chief of Muni. And in the search for his replacement, the SFMTA is switching it up from their conventional nationwide hunt and sticking to the local candidates with more intimate knowledge of the city’s transit history and needs.

Tom Nolan, the Chair of SFMTA’s Board of Directors, revealed the leading local choices to be Chief of Department of Public Works Ed Reiskin and Executive Deputy Director and Interim Boss of the SFMTA Carter Rohan.

Reiskin is described as the more popular and likely choice because of Rohan’s time spent in Texas, where his family resides. Friday’s SF Examiner Editorial entitled “What the City needs from Muni’s next boss“, explains the need for a chief that is “in-it-for-the-long-haul” with “100 percent commitment to solving the problems.” The column specifically criticizes Ford for displaying a lack of investment into his post other than using it as a “stepping stone to some even-larger city’s better-paying transit post” as exemplified by his recent dalliance with DC’s Airports Authority.
It should also be mentioned that these changes bring some potentially good news for the taxpayers. The SFMTA is looking to negotiate the salary with its next chief, which will hopefully mean that he won’t be making Nathaniel Ford’s preposterous $308,000 annual salary. Not only was Ford the highest-paid city official, he is also receiving a $384,000 severance check along with three months of $3,000/month family healthcare coverage. On top of that, he will also be cashing in $67,000 worth of deferred compensation and unclaimed bonuses.
Source: SF Examiner

Plaintiff Magazine: Bike Law 101 by Shaana Rahman

Posted on by Shaana A. Rahman

As those of you who follow us on Facebook may know, our very own Shaana Rahman recently wrote an article for Plaintiff Magazine in which she outlines 4 key tips to bike law and to representing cyclists.

As explained in the article, the attention directed on cyclist-motorist collisions–and the laws concerning them–is a direct result of the rise in urban cycling.
While I highly recommend reading the article itself, here is a brief summary of the 4 tips Ms. Rahman offers:
  1. Remember that the California Vehicle Code applies to cyclists: “It is important to ascertain whether or not your cyclist was in a riding position that comports with the Vehicle Code.“
  2. Get to know what type of cyclist your client is: “The best client will be someone who is an experienced rider, riding a bicycle that has all the requisite safety equipment, meeting the requirements of Vehicle Code sections 21201 and 21201.5 and who is wearing bright, reflective clothing (including a helmet) to maximize their visibility.“
  3. Evaluate differently each of the 5 most common car-versus-bike collisions: “1) A vehicle making a right turn across the cyclist’s lane of travel; 2) A vehicle executing a left turn at an uncontrolled (or non-dedicated left turn) intersection; 3) Dooring; 4) The failure of the cyclist or motorist to stop at a red light or stop sign, and 5) A vehicle or cyclist passing on the right.”
  4. Identify the other causes of the collision, including defective roadway collisions: “If you can identify a dangerous roadway condition, you will need to pursue a claim against any public entity that owned, possessed or maintained the roadway. If the public entity retained a private contractor to perform the road work which gave rise to the defect, the contractor will also be a defendant.”

If you are a regular reader of our blog or Facebook, or even if you have just been in the city streets, you are probably more than aware of how important bike law and safety is becoming. These tips, particularly the 4th, are critically important to follow when defending your client, not only to aid the individual, but to prevent future accidents from occurring by improving the condition in which our cyclists are riding.

Make it your mission to protect and speak up for these cyclists if you want to see some real change to our city.

Folding Bikes on Muni

Posted on by Shaana A. Rahman

Muni has recently decided to allow folding bikes aboard all buses and streetcars, excluding the historic cable cars.

Bike advocates including Bert Hill, chairman of the SF Bicycle Advisory Committee, have been lobbying for all bikes to be allowed onto Muni buses. Nevertheless, Hill and others see this as a step in the right direction. Spokesman Paul Rose of the MTA believes this policy will promote the city’s transit-first policy which, according to the Chronicle, “aims to get people out of their cars to cut down on air pollution and traffic congestion.”
However, Rose also warns that officials need to keep an eye on how this change will affect commuters. Because while Hill and other bike advocates have responded positively to this announcement, many comments on this article–by mostly non-biking commuters–are not nearly as welcoming. The topics of criticisms range from demanding bikers pay extra to complaining that bikes will overcrowd already overcrowded buses. Such comments included:
JuniperoSerra: Bad idea! Who wants to get dirt from their tires or grease from the bike’s chain on their clothes when these folks take their folding bikes onto a crowed [sic] bus or streetcar.
ender_of_sf: Things are bad enough on our too often overcrowded busses [sic] as it is, espeically [sic] during commute hours. Why do bike riders think the public transit should haul their vehicals [sic] around at no extra charge when they don’t feel like riding them.
sfnative650: So now some guy rides his bike up to the bus and everybody has to wait for him to fold up his bike? And then they get to trip over it trying to get in or out the bus? Looks like lawsuits here…Aren’t bikes to be ridden and not ride on a bus? How about the bus tow a trailer behind it so you can store your car and ride the bus?
qframer: I’m a folding bike rider. I love them. I am a member of bicycle advocacy groups, and I want transit options for bikes.
But this is INSANITY. There is no way I can fit comfortably in any Muni vehicle with my folding bike unless it is nearly empty. I can’t believe both Muni and Bicycle Coalition people put this much effort into something that will only build resentment toward cyclists.
What are your thoughts?

Muni Overtime Budget Exceeds Expectations

Posted on by Rahman Law PC

Muni’s budget for overtime this year was $30.8 million out of a total budget of $775 million. Now overtime has gone up $18 million to $48.3 million. Why?

A normal day for Muni requires 1,491 operators to run all services. And also on any normal day, they are short 300 of those required operators (which might explain why your bus never seems to be coming). Muni officials say that if they were to decrease the budget for overtime, buses would have to run less frequently, angering more passengers.
However, passengers are already angry. Comments in Chronicle article say things like, “The riding public will not miss the runs as it’ll just be normal riding Muni” and “Is anyone working for this agency competent? Problems with drivers are well known, but it’s pretty clear that management (especially the absentee Nat Ford) are a pack of idiots as well.”
And the criticisms aren’t just coming from the public, but from city officials as well. Board President David Chiu is accusing Muni officials for not taking their budget mishaps seriously, saying, “The years of promises remind me of Groundhog Day. Management is far better at providing excuses than delivering results.”