Bicycle Accident Complaint - Maine

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES (BICYCLE COLLISION) — MAINE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Caption
2. Parties, Jurisdiction, and Venue
3. General Factual Allegations
4. Count I — Negligence (Against Defendant Driver)
5. Count II — Negligence Per Se (Against Defendant Driver)
6. Count III — Vicarious Liability / Negligent Entrustment (Against Defendant Owner)
7. Damages
8. Prayer for Relief
9. Demand for Trial by Jury
10. Signature and Service Blocks
11. Maine Practice Notes
12. Sources and References

1. CAPTION

STATE OF MAINE

[COUNTY NAME], ss.

SUPERIOR COURT

CIVIL ACTION

DOCKET NO. [________________________________]

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES (BICYCLE COLLISION) AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

NOW COMES the Plaintiff, by and through undersigned counsel, and complaining of the Defendants alleges as follows:

2. PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE

1. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME] ("Plaintiff") is an individual residing in [MUNICIPALITY], [COUNTY] County, Maine, and at all material times was lawfully operating a bicycle upon the public ways of this State.

2. Defendant [DRIVER NAME] ("Defendant Driver") is an individual residing in [MUNICIPALITY / STATE] and may be served with process at [SERVICE ADDRESS].

3. Defendant [OWNER NAME] ("Defendant Owner") is [an individual residing in / a business entity organized under the laws of] [MUNICIPALITY / STATE] and was, at all relevant times, the titled owner of the motor vehicle operated by Defendant Driver.

4. This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over this civil action pursuant to 4 M.R.S. § 105.

5. Venue is proper in this County under 14 M.R.S. § 501 et seq. because the Collision occurred in, and/or one or more parties reside in, [COUNTY] County, Maine.

3. GENERAL FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

6. On or about [__/__/____] at approximately [TIME], Plaintiff was lawfully operating a bicycle, traveling [DIRECTION] on [ROADWAY] at or near its intersection with [CROSS-STREET] in [MUNICIPALITY], [COUNTY] County, Maine (the "Collision").

7. At all material times, Plaintiff operated the bicycle in a careful and prudent manner, rode on the right portion of the way as far as practicable consistent with 29-A M.R.S. § 2063 (subject to the exceptions therein), maintained a proper lookout, and obeyed all applicable traffic laws. [If applicable: Plaintiff's bicycle displayed the lighting and reflectors required by 29-A M.R.S. § 2084, and Plaintiff was wearing high-visibility apparel.]

8. At the same time and place, Defendant Driver was operating a [YEAR / MAKE / MODEL] [passenger vehicle / pickup truck / SUV / commercial vehicle] owned by Defendant Owner.

9. The Collision occurred when Defendant Driver [SELECT / DESCRIBE THE MANNER OF COLLISION — e.g., overtook and passed Plaintiff's bicycle at a distance of less than three feet, striking Plaintiff; turned right across Plaintiff's path of travel (a "right hook"); turned left across the path of Plaintiff's oncoming bicycle (a "left cross"); failed to yield the right-of-way at an intersection; opened a vehicle door into Plaintiff's path of travel (a "dooring"); was driving while distracted or speeding], causing Defendant Driver's vehicle [and/or its door] to violently collide with Plaintiff and Plaintiff's bicycle.

10. Although Plaintiff was plainly visible and lawfully entitled to the use of the way, Defendant Driver failed to detect, yield to, account for, and safely share the way with Plaintiff's bicycle.

11. Under 29-A M.R.S. § 2063(5), a person riding a bicycle on a way has the rights, and is subject to the duties, applicable to the operator of a vehicle. Plaintiff had the right-of-way and at no time did anything that caused or contributed to the Collision. The collision of Defendant Driver's motor vehicle with Plaintiff while passing constitutes prima facie evidence of a violation of the three-foot passing requirement under 29-A M.R.S. § 2070(1-A).

12. The [Maine State Police / [Local] Police Department / Sheriff's Office] investigated the Collision and [cited Defendant Driver for violation of 29-A M.R.S. § [SECTION] / determined Defendant Driver to be at fault].

13. As a direct and proximate result of the Collision, Plaintiff was thrown from the bicycle and sustained serious, painful, and permanent bodily injuries, including but not limited to [DESCRIBE INJURIES — e.g., orthopedic fractures, traumatic brain injury, spinal injury, internal injuries, road rash / degloving, and disfiguring scarring], requiring emergency transport to [HOSPITAL] and subsequent medical care.

14. Because a bicyclist is wholly unprotected by the structural protection, restraint systems, and crumple zones of an enclosed motor vehicle, the forces of the Collision caused Plaintiff to suffer injuries materially more severe than those typically sustained by occupants of passenger vehicles.

4. COUNT I — NEGLIGENCE (Against Defendant Driver)

15. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 14 as though fully set forth herein.

16. Defendant Driver owed Plaintiff a duty to exercise reasonable care in the operation of a motor vehicle, including the duty to keep a proper lookout for bicyclists, to leave not less than three feet when overtaking and passing a bicycle, to yield the right-of-way, to refrain from making a right or left turn near a bicyclist unless it could be done with reasonable safety, to maintain a reasonable speed, to refrain from opening a vehicle door into the path of a bicyclist, and to operate the vehicle in accordance with Maine law.

17. Defendant Driver breached that duty by, among other things:

• Failing to keep a proper and careful lookout for bicycle traffic lawfully sharing the way;
• Overtaking and passing Plaintiff's bicycle at a distance of less than three feet;
• Making a right turn (a "right hook") or a left turn (a "left cross") near or across the path of Plaintiff's bicycle when it could not be done with reasonable safety;
• Failing to yield the right-of-way to Plaintiff's bicycle;
• Opening a vehicle door into the path of Plaintiff's bicycle when it was unsafe to do so;
• Operating the vehicle at a speed greater than was reasonable and prudent under the conditions;
• Driving while distracted or inattentive;
• Failing to take reasonable evasive action to avoid the Collision; and
• Otherwise failing to exercise the degree of care that an ordinarily prudent driver would have exercised under the same or similar circumstances.

18. Defendant Driver's negligence was the direct and proximate cause of the Collision and of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

19. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff has sustained the damages described in Section 7 below.

5. COUNT II — NEGLIGENCE PER SE (Against Defendant Driver)

20. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 19 as though fully set forth herein.

21. At the time of the Collision, Defendant Driver violated one or more provisions of Title 29-A of the Maine Revised Statutes enacted for the protection of bicyclists and other persons lawfully using the way, including but not limited to:

• 29-A M.R.S. § 2070(1-A) — the operator of a motor vehicle passing a bicycle proceeding in the same direction shall exercise due care by leaving a distance of not less than three feet between the motor vehicle and the bicycle while passing; the collision of a motor vehicle with a person operating a bicycle is prima facie evidence of a violation of this subsection;
• 29-A M.R.S. § 2060(1-A) — a motorist near a bicyclist proceeding in the same direction may not make a right turn unless it can be done with reasonable safety and without interfering with the safe and legal operation of the bicycle (the "right hook");
• 29-A M.R.S. § 2060(2)–(2-A) — a motorist intending to turn left must yield to a bicyclist approaching from the opposite direction that is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard, and may not make a left turn near a bicyclist unless it can be done with reasonable safety (the "left cross");
• 29-A M.R.S. § 2074 (following another vehicle too closely); and/or
• 29-A M.R.S. § 2075 (operating a vehicle at an unreasonable or imprudent speed).

22. By operation of 29-A M.R.S. § 2063(5), Plaintiff — as a person riding a bicycle on a way — was within the class of persons these statutes were enacted to protect, and the Collision is the type of harm they were designed to prevent.

23. Defendant Driver's violation of these statutes constitutes negligence per se / evidence of negligence under Maine law, and such violation was a direct and proximate cause of the Collision and of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

6. COUNT III — VICARIOUS LIABILITY / NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT (Against Defendant Owner)

24. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 23 as though fully set forth herein.

25. Defendant Owner entrusted the subject vehicle to Defendant Driver when Defendant Owner knew or, in the exercise of reasonable care, should have known that Defendant Driver was an incompetent, inexperienced, unfit, or reckless operator likely to create an unreasonable risk of harm to others.

26. In the alternative, at the time of the Collision Defendant Driver was operating the vehicle within the course and scope of an agency or employment relationship with Defendant Owner, rendering Defendant Owner vicariously liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior.

27. Defendant Owner's negligent entrustment and/or vicarious liability was a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries and damages, for which Defendant Owner is liable.

7. DAMAGES

28. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' negligence, Plaintiff has suffered, and will continue to suffer, the following damages:

• Economic damages: past and future medical, hospital, surgical, rehabilitative, and related expenses; past lost wages; future lost earnings and diminished earning capacity; and property damage to the bicycle, helmet, riding gear, and personal property.
• Non-economic damages: past and future physical pain and suffering; mental anguish; disfigurement, scarring, and permanent impairment; and loss of enjoyment of life.

29. Punitive damages. To the extent the evidence establishes by clear and convincing proof that Defendant Driver acted with express or implied malice, Plaintiff seeks punitive damages as permitted under Maine common law (Tuttle v. Raymond, 494 A.2d 1353 (Me. 1985)).

8. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully demands judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally to the extent permitted by law, as follows:

• A. For compensatory economic and non-economic damages in an amount to be determined by the jury;
• B. For punitive damages as permitted by Maine law;
• C. For pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as allowed by 14 M.R.S. § 1602-B and § 1602-C;
• D. For the costs of this action; and
• E. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

9. DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY

Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable as a matter of right pursuant to Me. R. Civ. P. 38.

10. SIGNATURE AND SERVICE BLOCKS

Dated: [__/__/____]

Respectfully submitted,

[LAW FIRM NAME]

By: [________________________________]

[ATTORNEY NAME], Maine Bar No. [________]

Counsel for Plaintiff

[STREET ADDRESS]

[CITY, STATE ZIP]

Telephone: [NUMBER]

Email: [EMAIL]

11. MAINE PRACTICE NOTES

• Statute of limitations. Maine has an unusually long SIX-year limitation for civil actions, including personal injury, under 14 M.R.S. § 752. Confirm accrual and any tolling (e.g., minority under § 853).
• Three-foot passing + prima facie clause. 29-A M.R.S. § 2070(1-A) requires not less than three feet when passing a bicycle, and expressly makes the collision of a motor vehicle with a bicyclist prima facie evidence of a violation — a powerful pleading and proof tool. Document lane width, shoulder width, and the cyclist's position.
• Right-hook / left-cross. 29-A M.R.S. § 2060(1-A) bars a right turn near a cyclist unless it can be made with reasonable safety; § 2060(2)–(2-A) requires a left-turning motorist to yield to an oncoming cyclist and bars a left turn near a cyclist unless it can be made with reasonable safety.
• Comparative negligence (§ 156). A claimant "found by the jury to be equally at fault" may not recover. The statute measures the claimant's share in responsibility for the damage and addresses fault of an "other person or persons"; do not substitute a singular-defendant comparison in a multiparty case. The jury must find total damages and reduce them "by dollars and cents, and not by percentage," returning both figures.
• Cyclist duties. Plead the cyclist's compliance with § 2063 (ride to the right as far as practicable, with stated exceptions; paved-shoulder right) and invoke the door-zone / hazard / substandard-width-lane exceptions.
• Pleading standard. Maine follows notice pleading under Me. R. Civ. P. 8(a); plead the elements of each claim with sufficient supporting facts to withstand a Rule 12(b)(6) motion.
• Punitive damages. Punitive damages require malice proven by clear and convincing evidence (Tuttle v. Raymond); they are not available for ordinary negligence. Plead the factual basis.
• Service of process. Service is governed by Me. R. Civ. P. 4; out-of-state defendants may be served under Maine's long-arm statute, 14 M.R.S. § 704-A.

12. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• 14 M.R.S. § 752 (six-year statute of limitations) — https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/14/title14sec752.html
• 14 M.R.S. § 156 (comparative negligence) — https://mainelegislature.org/legis/statutes/14/title14sec156.html
• 4 M.R.S. § 105 (Superior Court jurisdiction)
• 14 M.R.S. § 501 et seq. (venue)
• 29-A M.R.S. § 2070 (passing another vehicle; three-foot bicycle rule and prima facie clause) — https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/29-A/title29-Asec2070.html
• 29-A M.R.S. § 2063 (bicycles, roller skis and scooters — rights, duties, riding to the right) — https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/29-A/title29-Asec2063.html
• 29-A M.R.S. § 2060 (turning at intersections; left-turn yield; right/left turns near bicyclists) — https://legislature.maine.gov/statutes/29-A/title29-Asec2060.html
• 29-A M.R.S. §§ 2074, 2075 (following too closely; speed)
• 29-A M.R.S. § 2084 (bicycle lighting and reflectors)
• 24-A M.R.S. § 2902 (uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage)
• Maine Rules of Civil Procedure (Rules 4, 8, 38) — https://www.courts.maine.gov/

Disclaimer: This template is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. An attorney licensed in Maine must review and customize this document before filing. Laws, citations, and court rules change frequently; verify all authorities before use.