Bicycle Accident Complaint - Minnesota

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES (BICYCLE COLLISION) — MINNESOTA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Caption
2. Parties
3. Jurisdiction and Venue
4. General Factual Allegations
5. No-Fault / Threshold Allegations
6. Count I — Negligence (Against Defendant Driver)
7. Count II — Negligence Per Se / Statutory Violation (Safe Passing / Right-of-Way / Cyclist-Rights) (Against Defendant Driver)
8. Count III — Owner's Vicarious Liability / Negligent Entrustment (Against Defendant Owner)
9. Damages
10. Comparative Fault Allegations
11. Prayer for Relief
12. Demand for Jury Trial
13. Acknowledgment, Verification, and Signature
14. Certificate of Service
15. Minnesota Practice Notes
16. Sources and References

1. CAPTION

STATE OF MINNESOTA

DISTRICT COURT — [____] JUDICIAL DISTRICT

COUNTY OF [COUNTY]     Case Type: Personal Injury

Court File No. [____________]

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES (BICYCLE COLLISION)

AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff, for the Complaint against the Defendants, states and alleges as follows:

2. PARTIES

1. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME] ("Plaintiff") is an individual resident of [COUNTY] County, Minnesota, who at all material times was lawfully operating a bicycle upon or adjacent to the public roadways of this State.

2. Defendant [DRIVER NAME] ("Driver Defendant") is, upon information and belief, an individual resident of [COUNTY/STATE] who, at all material times, operated the motor vehicle described below.

3. Defendant [OWNER / EMPLOYER NAME] ("Owner Defendant") is [an individual resident of / a corporation or other entity with its principal place of business in] [COUNTY/STATE] and, at all material times, was the titled and/or registered owner of the vehicle operated by Driver Defendant, and/or employed Driver Defendant.

3. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. This action arises under Minnesota common and statutory law for personal injuries sustained by a bicyclist struck by a motor vehicle in [CITY], [COUNTY] County, Minnesota, on [__/__/____].

5. This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to Minn. Const. art. VI, § 3 and Minn. Stat. § 484.01.

6. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants because they reside in, transact business in, and/or committed a tortious act within the State of Minnesota.

7. Venue is proper in this county under Minn. Stat. § 542.09 because the Collision occurred in this county and/or one or more Defendants resides in this county.

4. GENERAL FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

8. On [__/__/____] at approximately [TIME], Plaintiff was lawfully riding a bicycle [traveling [northbound / southbound / etc.] as close to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway as Plaintiff determined to be safe, or within an exception under Minn. Stat. § 169.222, subd. 4 / in a bicycle lane / on the shoulder in the same direction as traffic] at or near its intersection with [CROSS STREET / LANDMARK], in [CITY], Minnesota (the "Collision").

9. At the time of the Collision, Plaintiff was operating the bicycle in a lawful, prudent, and careful manner and was exercising due care for Plaintiff's own safety, including the use of such lights, signals, and lane position as Minnesota law requires.

10. At the same time and place, Driver Defendant was operating a [YEAR / MAKE / MODEL] [passenger vehicle / pickup truck / SUV / commercial vehicle] — a "motor vehicle" within the meaning of the Minnesota traffic and no-fault laws — owned by Owner Defendant, traveling [northbound / southbound / etc.] on [ROADWAY].

11. Traffic, lighting, roadway, and weather conditions were [describe — e.g., clear, dry, daylight; dusk; rain], and Plaintiff was [describe visibility — e.g., plainly visible and operating with lawful lights and reflectors].

12. The Collision occurred when Driver Defendant [SELECT / DESCRIBE THE MANNER OF COLLISION — e.g., overtook and passed Plaintiff's bicycle at a distance of less than three feet, striking or sideswiping Plaintiff (unsafe passing / 3-foot violation); turned right across Plaintiff's path after overtaking the bicycle (right hook); turned left across the path of Plaintiff's oncoming bicycle without yielding (left cross); opened a vehicle door into Plaintiff's path of travel (dooring); failed to keep a proper lookout for bicyclists; was traveling at an excessive speed for conditions; was distracted by a mobile device].

13. Although Plaintiff was plainly visible and lawfully operating the bicycle, Driver Defendant "looked but failed to see" Plaintiff, failed to keep a proper and careful lookout, failed to reduce speed, and/or failed to take available evasive action, striking Plaintiff with the front, side, [or door] of the vehicle.

14. As a direct and proximate result of the Collision, Plaintiff — an unprotected and vulnerable road user with no structural protection, restraint system, or crumple zone of any kind — was violently struck and thrown from the bicycle, and sustained severe, painful, and permanent bodily injuries, including but not limited to [LIST INJURIES — e.g., traumatic brain injury, skull and facial fractures, spinal injury, multiple orthopedic fractures, internal organ injuries, degloving and crush injuries, road rash, and disfiguring scarring].

15. Because a bicyclist struck by a motor vehicle absorbs the full force of the impact directly upon the body, the Collision caused Plaintiff to suffer catastrophic injuries materially more severe than those typically sustained by vehicle occupants in comparable collisions.

16. Plaintiff received emergency care at [HOSPITAL / EMS PROVIDER] and has since undergone [SURGERIES / HOSPITALIZATION / REHABILITATION / ONGOING TREATMENT], and will require future medical care.

5. NO-FAULT / THRESHOLD ALLEGATIONS

17. Under the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act, Minn. Stat. §§ 65B.41–65B.71, a person who suffers injury arising out of the maintenance or use of a motor vehicle — including a bicyclist struck by a motor vehicle — has a right to basic economic loss (PIP) benefits. Minn. Stat. § 65B.46, subd. 1. Plaintiff's entitlement to and priority for such benefits are governed by Minn. Stat. § 65B.47 (drawing first from any household automobile security available to Plaintiff and, in its absence, from the security covering the striking vehicle). Plaintiff has pursued or is pursuing all available first-party benefits, and any applicable coordination or priority of benefits will be resolved.

18. To the extent the tort threshold of Minn. Stat. § 65B.51, subd. 3 applies to this action, Plaintiff satisfies it because Plaintiff has incurred reasonable medical expense benefits exceeding $4,000 (exclusive of diagnostic and rehabilitative items as provided in the statute) and/or has sustained permanent disfigurement, permanent injury, and/or disability for 60 days or more, thereby permitting recovery of damages for noneconomic detriment.

6. COUNT I — NEGLIGENCE (Against Defendant Driver)

19. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 18 as if fully set forth herein.

20. Driver Defendant owed Plaintiff a duty to exercise reasonable care in the operation of a motor vehicle, to obey the Minnesota traffic laws, to overtake and pass Plaintiff's bicycle leaving a safe distance of not less than three feet, to yield the right-of-way as required, to keep a proper lookout for bicyclists, and to exercise due care to avoid colliding with any bicycle upon the roadway.

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

• Overtaking and passing Plaintiff's bicycle at an unsafe distance of less than three feet, and failing to maintain clearance until safely past;
• Turning right or left across Plaintiff's path of travel without yielding the right-of-way;
• Opening a vehicle door into the path of Plaintiff's bicycle;
• Failing to keep a proper and careful lookout for Plaintiff, who was plainly visible;
• Failing to exercise due care to avoid colliding with Plaintiff;
• Operating the vehicle at a speed greater than was reasonable and prudent under the conditions;
• Driving while distracted or inattentive;
• Failing to reduce speed, brake, or take available evasive action to avoid striking Plaintiff; and
• Failing to maintain proper control of the vehicle.

22. Each of the foregoing acts and omissions, separately and in combination, was a direct and proximate cause of the Collision and of Plaintiff's injuries and damages described below.

7. COUNT II — NEGLIGENCE PER SE / STATUTORY VIOLATION (SAFE PASSING / RIGHT-OF-WAY / CYCLIST-RIGHTS) (Against Defendant Driver)

23. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 22 as if fully set forth herein.

24. The Minnesota traffic laws impose specific statutory duties on Driver Defendant for the protection of bicyclists such as Plaintiff. These include, as applicable to the manner of the Collision:

• Minn. Stat. § 169.18, subd. 3 — the operator of a motor vehicle overtaking a bicycle proceeding in the same direction on the roadway shall leave a safe distance, but in no case less than three feet clearance, when passing the bicycle, and shall maintain that clearance until safely past the overtaken bicycle;
• Minn. Stat. § 169.21, subd. 3(d) — notwithstanding the other provisions of the section, every driver shall exercise due care to avoid colliding with any bicycle or pedestrian, give an audible signal when necessary, and exercise proper precaution upon observing any child or any obviously confused or incapacitated person upon a roadway;
• Minn. Stat. § 169.06 — duty to obey traffic-control devices and signals; and/or
• Minn. Stat. § 169.14 — a driver shall not drive at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions, and shall reduce speed as necessary to avoid colliding with any person on or entering the highway.

25. Under Minn. Stat. § 169.222, subd. 1, every person operating a bicycle has all of the rights and duties applicable to the driver of any other vehicle, except as to provisions relating expressly to bicycles or which by their nature cannot reasonably be applied. Plaintiff was therefore entitled to the protections of the foregoing statutes and to the ordinary rules of the road governing right-of-way; and Plaintiff complied with the duty under § 169.222, subd. 4 to ride as close to the right-hand curb or edge as Plaintiff determined to be safe, or within an exception thereto.

26. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 169.96(b), Driver Defendant's violation of the foregoing traffic regulations is prima facie evidence of negligence. Plaintiff is within the class of persons the foregoing statutes were enacted to protect, and the Collision is the type of harm those statutes were designed to prevent.

27. Driver Defendant violated [CITE THE SPECIFIC SECTION(S) APPLICABLE], and was cited for [TRAFFIC CITATION, IF ANY], which violation was a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

8. COUNT III — OWNER'S VICARIOUS LIABILITY / NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT (Against Defendant Owner)

28. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 27 as if fully set forth herein.

29. At the time of the Collision, the subject vehicle was being operated with the express or implied consent of Owner Defendant. Owner Defendant is therefore vicariously liable for the negligent operation of the vehicle pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 169.09, subd. 5a.

30. In the alternative, Owner Defendant negligently entrusted the subject vehicle to Driver Defendant when Owner Defendant knew, or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known, that Driver Defendant was an incompetent, inexperienced, reckless, or otherwise unfit driver; and/or Driver Defendant was operating the vehicle as the agent, servant, or employee of Owner Defendant within the scope of that agency or employment, rendering Owner Defendant vicariously liable under respondeat superior.

31. Owner Defendant's statutory and/or common-law liability was a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

9. DAMAGES

32. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' conduct, Plaintiff has suffered and seeks recovery of the following, past and future:

• Reasonable medical, hospital, surgical, rehabilitative, and pharmaceutical expenses, including future medical and life-care expenses;
• Wage loss and impairment of earning capacity;
• Pain, suffering, disability, and emotional distress;
• Permanent injury, impairment, and disfigurement, including scarring;
• Loss of the enjoyment of life; and
• Property damage to the bicycle, helmet, cycling apparel, electronics, and personal effects, to the extent recoverable.

33. Plaintiff's damages exceed $50,000, exclusive of interest and costs, in an amount to be proven at trial. Any recovery shall be subject to the deduction of basic economic loss benefits paid or payable as provided in Minn. Stat. § 65B.51, subd. 1.

34. Plaintiff reserves the right to move to amend the pleadings to seek punitive damages pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 549.191 and 549.20 upon a prima facie showing of deliberate disregard for the rights or safety of others (e.g., impaired driving, hit-and-run, or extreme recklessness).

10. COMPARATIVE FAULT ALLEGATIONS

35. Plaintiff denies any comparative fault and alleges that Plaintiff exercised due care for Plaintiff's own safety at all material times.

36. In the alternative, and pursuant to Minnesota's comparative-fault statute, Minn. Stat. § 604.01, any fault attributable to Plaintiff was not greater than the fault of each person against whom recovery is sought and does not bar recovery against that person; any allowed damages shall be reduced in proportion to the fault attributable to Plaintiff.

11. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against the Defendants, jointly and/or severally as the law allows, as follows:

• A. Awarding general and special damages in an amount in excess of $50,000, to be determined at trial;
• B. Awarding costs, disbursements, and pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as allowed by law;
• C. Awarding punitive damages upon proper amendment and proof; and
• D. Granting such other and further relief as the Court deems just and equitable.

12. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable, pursuant to Minn. R. Civ. P. 38.

13. ACKNOWLEDGMENT, VERIFICATION, AND SIGNATURE

The undersigned attorney acknowledges, pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 549.211, that to the best of the undersigned's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after reasonable inquiry, this pleading is well-grounded in fact and warranted by existing law or a good-faith argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ [________________________________]

[ATTORNEY NAME] (Atty. Reg. No. [________])

[LAW FIRM NAME]

Attorney for Plaintiff

[STREET ADDRESS]

[CITY, STATE ZIP]

Telephone: [___-___-____]

Email: [EMAIL]

Dated: [__/__/____]

VERIFICATION. I, [PLAINTIFF NAME], declare under penalty of perjury that I have read the foregoing Complaint and that its factual statements are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.

Date: [__/__/____]     [________________________________]

[PLAINTIFF NAME], Plaintiff

14. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on [__/__/____], the foregoing COMPLAINT was served upon the Defendant(s) by [personal service of the Summons and Complaint under Minn. R. Civ. P. 4 / the Minnesota E-Filing System (eFS) upon counsel of record].

/s/ [________________________________]

[ATTORNEY NAME]

15. MINNESOTA PRACTICE NOTES

• Statute of limitations. A personal-injury action must be commenced within six years. Minn. Stat. § 541.05, subd. 1(5). (Minnesota's six-year period is longer than the three-year period in many states; wrongful-death actions are governed by Minn. Stat. § 573.02.) Commencement occurs upon service under Minn. R. Civ. P. 3.01.
• No-fault / PIP for a struck bicyclist — the central insurance issue. Minnesota is a no-fault state. A bicyclist struck by a motor vehicle is entitled to basic economic loss (PIP) benefits under Minn. Stat. § 65B.46, subd. 1. The priority rules of Minn. Stat. § 65B.47 generally draw first from any automobile no-fault security available to the bicyclist through the bicyclist's own household policy; where no such security exists, benefits are sought from the security covering the striking vehicle. Identify and coordinate all first-party benefits promptly. (Note: if the cyclist were struck by a MOTORCYCLE rather than a motor vehicle, only basic economic loss benefits — not noneconomic recovery through the no-fault gateway — would generally be available; this Complaint assumes a motor-vehicle striking unit.)
• Tort threshold (§ 65B.51, subd. 3). To recover noneconomic damages, the bicyclist must satisfy the threshold: more than $4,000 in qualifying medical expense (excluding diagnostic and rehabilitative items per the statute), OR permanent disfigurement, permanent injury, death, or disability for 60 days or more. Catastrophic bicycle injuries usually satisfy the threshold readily; plead it (see ¶ 18).
• Comparative fault (person-specific comparison). Under Minn. Stat. § 604.01, the bicyclist may recover against a person if the bicyclist's fault is not greater than that person's fault; recovery is barred as to that person when the bicyclist's fault is greater, and allowed damages are otherwise reduced proportionally. Anticipate defense arguments about lane position, signals, running a stop sign/signal, or riding unlit; the driver's overriding duty of due care under § 169.21, subd. 3(d) remains regardless of any cyclist fault.
• Bicyclist's own duties / cyclist rights. Minn. Stat. § 169.222 gives the cyclist the rights and duties of a vehicle driver (subd. 1) and sets the ride-right duty and its exceptions (subd. 4); the safe-passing duty is in § 169.18, subd. 3. Address the cyclist's lawful operation affirmatively (see ¶¶ 8–9) to blunt comparative-fault defenses.
• Helmet non-use. Minnesota has no bicycle-helmet mandate; helmet non-use does not cause a collision and should not be comparative fault as to liability. Move in limine to exclude it and confirm current authority on its treatment as to damages.
• UM/UIM and hit-and-run. A struck bicyclist frequently faces an uninsured, underinsured, or unidentified (hit-and-run) driver. Minnesota requires UM and UIM coverage on automobile policies (Minn. Stat. § 65B.49, subd. 3a), and a bicyclist injured by an uninsured or hit-and-run vehicle may have UM coverage available through the bicyclist's own household auto policy or a resident relative's policy. Identify and notify all potentially applicable UM/UIM carriers promptly, preserve those claims, and comply with consent-to-settle and subrogation procedures before resolving the liability claim.

16. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Minnesota Statutes — https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/
• Minn. Stat. § 541.05 (limitations) — https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/541.05
• Minn. Stat. § 604.01 (comparative fault) — https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/604.01
• Minn. Stat. § 169.18 (overtaking and passing; 3-foot passing of a bicycle, subd. 3) — https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/169.18
• Minn. Stat. § 169.222 (operation of bicycle; rights and duties of a vehicle driver) — https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/169.222
• Minn. Stat. § 169.21 (driver duty to exercise due care to avoid colliding with a bicycle, subd. 3(d)) — https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/169.21
• Minn. Stat. § 169.14 (speed) — https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/169.14
• Minn. Stat. § 169.96 (violation as prima facie evidence of negligence) — https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/169.96
• Minn. Stat. § 65B.46 (right to benefits) — https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/65B.46
• Minn. Stat. § 65B.47 (priority of benefit obligations) — https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/65B.47
• Minn. Stat. § 65B.51 (tort threshold) — https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/65B.51
• Minn. Stat. § 65B.49 (UM/UIM coverage) — https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/65B.49
• Minn. Stat. § 169.09 (owner liability) — https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/169.09
• Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure (Rules 3, 4, 8, 38)

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