I was injured when I was riding a bicycle with two of my friends. Unfortunately for me, I was riding furthest away from the curb when a car struck me. Do I have a claim for my injuries?

In New York, bicycle accidents involving motor vehicles have two main issues. An injured cyclist must navigate both the statutory frameworks governing roadway operations and the distinct rules of New York’s No-Fault Insurance Law. Moreover, understanding how these statutory duties overlap is vital when evaluating liability, comparative fault, and available compensation in personal injury litigation.

1. Statutory Duty of Care: Rights and Responsibilities of Bicyclists

Under Section 1231 of the New York Vehicle and Traffic Law (VTL), bicyclists on public highways are granted all of the rights and are subject to all of the duties applicable to the drivers of motor vehicles. However, this does not apply to special regulations or provisions that by their nature can have no application to bicylists.

Positioning on the Roadway: VTL § 1234

Pursuant to VTL § 1234(a), bicyclists operating on roadways are required to ride:

  • Within a usable bicycle lane, or
  • Near the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, or upon a usable right-hand shoulder, in a manner that prevents undue interference with traffic.

Exceptions to the Right-Side Requirement:
A cyclist is not strictly confined to the right edge when:

  1. Preparing for a left turn; or
  2. Reasonably necessary to avoid unsafe conditions (such as fixed or moving objects, parked vehicles, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards, or lanes too narrow for a bicycle and vehicle to travel safely side-by-side).

Riding Abreast

VTL § 1234(b) permits bicyclists to ride no more than two abreast. However, when being overtaken by a motor vehicle or when riding on a roadway without a dedicated bicycle lane, cyclists must ride single file.

2. The Motorist’s Statutory Duty: VTL § 1146

While cyclists must adhere to the rules of the road, drivers of motor vehicles owe a heightened duty of care to vulnerable road users. In fact, under VTL § 1146(a), every driver of a vehicle must exercise due care to avoid colliding with any bicyclist, pedestrian, or domestic animal upon any roadway. Additionally, drivers must give warning by sounding the horn when necessary.

A motorist’s failure to maintain a proper lookout, sound the horn when reasonably necessary, or exercise due care to avoid hitting a bicyclist can constitute primary negligence or summary judgment grounds on liability. See Fernandez v. Ortiz, 183 A.D.3d 443 (1st Dept. 2020). Furthermore, drivers are charged with the duty to see what, under the existing circumstances, they should have seen.

3. Comparative Fault and Jury Questions

Under New York law governing actions commenced on or after May 26, 2026, motor vehicle personal injury actions are governed by a modified comparative fault standard. As a result, a claimant is barred from recovering non-economic damages if their share of culpable conduct is greater than 50% (or greater than the combined fault of the tortfeasors).

In bicycle collision cases involving alleged statutory non-compliance by either party, liability remains a factual evaluation for the jury. Even if a bicyclist fails to strictly comply with VTL § 1234 (e.g., riding three abreast or failing to use an available bike lane), that statutory violation does not automatically bar recovery. Instead, recovery is barred unless a jury determines the bicyclist accounts for more than 50% of the aggregate fault.

In a typical scenario where a motorist collides with a cyclist who was riding further from the curb than technically required, the jury evaluates the relative percentages of fault:

  • Motorist’s Fault. Failure to keep a proper lookout, failure to sound the horn, or failure to yield space under VTL § 1146.
  • Cyclist’s Fault. Failure to ride as near to the right curb as practicable or improper positioning under VTL § 1234.

4. Interaction with New York No-Fault Insurance Law

The New York Comprehensive Automobile Insurance Reparations Act (Insurance Law Article 51) treats bicyclists like pedestrians.

First-Party Benefits

  • Definition. Under Insurance Law § 5102(f) and VTL § 102, bicycles are not classified as “motor vehicles”.
  • Coverage. An injured bicyclist struck by a motor vehicle is classified as an “other person” entitled to First-Party Benefits (No-Fault benefits) under the insurance policy covering the vehicle that struck them. Oeschger v. Fullforth, 51 A.D.2d 864 (4th Dept. 1976); Insurance Law § 5102(j)).
  • Scope. No-Fault coverage pays up to $50,000 in basic economic loss, which includes necessary medical and hospital expenses, as well as 80% of lost earnings up to $2,000 per month for up to three years.

Third-Party Personal Injury Claims (“Serious Injury” Threshold)

Because an injured bicyclist receives First-Party Benefits from the motor vehicle’s insurer as a covered person, any third-party lawsuit brought against the driver or owner for non-economic loss (pain and suffering) is subject to the “serious injury” threshold set forth in Insurance Law § 5102(d).

Following the May 2026 legislative amendments, the “90/180-day” non-permanent injury category was completely eliminated from § 5102(d). Therefore, for actions filed on or after May 26, 2026, a bicyclist seeking recovery for non-economic loss must establish objective medical evidence satisfying one of the remaining eight statutory categories:

  1. Death;
  2. Dismemberment;
  3. Significant disfigurement;
  4. Fracture;
  5. Loss of a fetus;
  6. Permanent loss of use of a body organ, member, function, or system;
  7. Permanent consequential limitation of use of a body organ or member; or
  8. Significant limitation of use of a body function or system.

Key Takeaways for Legal Practitioners

  • Investigate Hazard Exceptions. When analyzing an alleged VTL § 1234 violation against a cyclist, document roadway conditions (lane width, debris, parked cars) that justified moving away from the right-hand curb.
  • Establish the Driver’s Lookout Duty. Use VTL § 1146  to demonstrate that the motorist had a statutory duty to observe and avoid the cyclist regardless of lane positioning.
  • Plead Remaining Threshold Categories. Because the 90/180-day rule was repealed in May 2026, claims for non-permanent soft-tissue injuries can no longer rely on daily activity disruption alone; focus discovery on proving “significant limitation” or “permanent consequential limitation” with objective quantitative medical proofs.
  • Monitor Comparative Fault Percentages. Ensure evidence establishes that the driver holds the majority share of fault to prevent the modified comparative fault rule from barring non-economic recovery.
  • Promptly File No-Fault Claims. File the No-Fault application (Form NF-2) with the vehicle’s insurer within 30 days of the accident to secure basic economic loss benefits up to $50,000.

By James Santner, Esq.

If you have questions about a similar situation, feel free to contact us. Consultations are free and there is no fee unless we win.