Chicago Accident Lawyer Blog

The Chicago bike injury lawyers of Zneimer & Zneimer P.C. have handled a number of cases where bicyclists or scooter riders were injured after hitting a defect on the bike path or road way.  A recent Illinois Supreme Court decision, Alave v. City of Chicago, highlights a harsh legal reality: even when the City encourages bicycling, it may not be legally responsible for unsafe streets unless the road is officially designated for bike use.

In Alave, the plaintiff, Clark Alave, was seriously injured while riding his own bicycle at night near the intersection of West Leland Avenue and North Western Avenue. As he crossed the street near a Divvy station, his front wheel dropped into a deep pothole hidden in the crosswalk. The fall knocked out teeth, caused facial scarring, and left him with hip and shoulder injuries. He sued the City of Chicago for negligence, alleging that the City knew or should have known about the hazardous road condition.

Alave’s attorneys pointed to the Divvy station located just 100 feet from the crash site, as well as City ordinances that restrict sidewalk riding for adults and treat bicyclists like vehicle drivers on the road. They argued that the City intended for cyclists to ride in that area and therefore had a duty to maintain the street in a safe condition.

At the Chicago bicycle attorneys Zneimer & Zneimer, P.C., our attorneys have long championed the rights of bicyclists across Illinois. As avid advocates for safer streets and comprehensive accountability, we have represented cyclists injured due to roadway defects, negligent drivers, and flawed infrastructure. With the rise in bike commuting and recreational riding, our legal team stays on the cutting edge of developments affecting bicycle law. Recent Illinois appellate decisions draw attention to the legal limitations placed on injured cyclists seeking justice.

For Illinois bicyclists, the sight of a paved path or quiet sidewalk might offer the promise of a safer ride. But two recent appellate decisions—Johnson v. Village of Palatine and Mankame v. Bloomingdale Township—reveal the precarious legal terrain that cyclists must navigate when the infrastructure fails them. Each case involves a serious personal injury to a bicyclist caused by defects or dangerous designs in public ways. Yet in both, the courts found that the municipalities could not be held liable, despite what might seem to a layperson like negligence. These decisions show how immunity doctrines and legal definitions can quietly shift the burden of injury, the cost of medical expenses, from the state to the cyclist.

In Johnson, the plaintiff was riding his bike along a sidewalk adjacent to Quentin Road in Palatine. It was a sunny June morning in 2020. As he approached an uneven slab of sidewalk, Johnson’s tire caught on a raised portion. He lost control and flew over the handlebars, landing in a bush and suffering serious injuries. He sued the Village, alleging negligent maintenance of the sidewalk. But the Village asserted it owed him no duty. Why? Because he was not an “intended user” of the sidewalk.

This seemingly arcane distinction became dispositive. Under section 3-102(a) of the Local Governmental and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act (745 ILCS 10/3-102(a)), municipalities owe a duty of care only to those who are both permitted and intended users of public property. The Village conceded Johnson was permitted to ride on the sidewalk—its own ordinances allowed bicycles unless expressly prohibited. But permission was not enough. The Village argued that its infrastructure, policies, and even the physical dimensions of the sidewalk showed it was built for pedestrians, not cyclists. And the court agreed. Despite the absence of any signs telling Johnson not to ride there, he was held to be outside the scope of the Village’s legal duty. Summary judgment was affirmed in the Village’s favor and Johnson was left to bear his own cost for injuries, bills, and suffering.

Contrast this with Mankame, a tragic case arising from the death of Ramdas Mankame in September 2020. He was riding on the North Central DuPage Regional Trail, a 19-mile multi-jurisdictional path connecting forest preserves and suburban roads. His route that day took him from a boardwalk segment over a wetland onto an “on-road” portion of the trail along Lawrence Avenue. As he descended a slope toward an intersection with Garden Avenue, a car traveling north struck him. He died from his injuries.

The executor of his estate sued Bloomingdale Township and the Village of Bloomingdale, alleging negligent and willful conduct in trail design and maintenance. She claimed the transition from off-street trail to on-road segment, the downhill grade, and the absence of traffic control created a foreseeable and previously reported hazard. Another bicyclist had reportedly been hit at the same location earlier that year.

But the court dismissed the case. The key defense rested on section 3-104 of the Tort Immunity Act, which provides absolute immunity for a public entity’s Continue reading

At Zneimer & Zneimer P.C., we handle personal injury cases involving injured bicyclists throughout Chicago and Illinois and have learned from experience that visibility plays a crucial role in bicycle accident cases. Both Illinois law and Chicago’s municipal code impose specific duties on bicyclists to help prevent crashes and to ensure that, if an accident happens, the bicyclist does not bear legal responsibility for failing to follow the rules.

The Rules of the Road Apply to Bicyclists

The Illinois Vehicle Code requires bicyclists to follow the same traffic laws that apply to motor vehicle drivers. Under 625 ILCS 5/11-1502, every person riding a bicycle upon a highway “shall be subject to all of the duties applicable to the driver of a vehicle,” unless a provision of the Code clearly does not apply. This includes obeying signals, yielding when required, and using lighting and reflectors for visibility at night. When bicyclists ride in traffic, the law treats them as drivers. That means the duty to avoid contributing to an accident is the same.

Chicago Ordinances Underline the Visibility Requirements

Chicago’s municipal code goes further. Under Chicago Municipal Code § 9-52-080, a bicycle used at night must be equipped with:

• A white headlamp visible from at least 500 feet in front,
• A rear red reflector that reflects headlights from up to 200 feet away,
• Or a rear red lamp that emits light visible from 200 feet,
• And a brake that can cause the braked wheel to skid on dry, level pavement.

These are not optional features. A bicyclist who rides at night without these elements violates the ordinance and may be found at fault in a collision. If the case proceeds to litigation, defense attorneys or insurance companies will likely use that violation to argue contributory negligence.

In addition, Section 9-52-100 makes clear that parents or guardians may not knowingly allow children to violate bicycle regulations, meaning that even adults who let their children ride without lights may face legal exposure.

Real Consequences in Real Cases

In Bolek v. West Shore Transport Co., a nine-year-old boy rode his bicycle at dusk and entered a street intersection where a tractor-trailer was turning. The boy had difficulty balancing the bicycle and did not have a headlamp. The trailer ran over him, causing fatal injuries. The plaintiff sued for wrongful death, arguing that the driver failed to keep a proper lookout or sound a warning. The court allowed the jury to consider whether the boy’s lack of a headlamp contributed to the collision. The jury returned a verdict for the defense. The appellate court affirmed the verdict, stating that the absence of a headlamp raised a valid question of contributory negligence. The court found that even though the driver may have failed to see the boy, the lack of a headlamp on the bicycle supported the defense theory that the boy’s visibility played a role in the accident.

In Savage v. Martin, a ten-year-old girl  was struck by a car while crossing an intersection on her bicycle in Chicago. Her mother filed a personal injury lawsuit against the driver, alleging that his negligence caused the accident. According to testimony, the child was 20 to 30 feet outside of  the crosswalk when the collision occurred.  As she was outside of the crosswalk, this may have affected her visibility to the driver, who claimed he did not expect a bicyclist to cross mid-block or outside the designated area.At trial, the court directed a verdict on contributory negligence, holding that the child was contributorily Continue reading

Bicyclists in Illinois and Chicago have the legal right to share the road with motor vehicles on the roadways.  Additionally, bicyclists have the legal responsibly to follow that same traffic laws that motor vehicles do.  The bicycle injury lawyers of Zneimer & Zneimer P.C. often use violations these statutes to prove negligence when litigating bike injury cases.

Illinois State Laws Protecting Bicyclists

1. Three-Foot Passing Law (625 ILCS 5/11-703)

Written and reviewed by Peter Zneimer, Zneimer & Zneimer P.C.

According to the Chicago Department of Transportation, bicycling grew more in Chicago than any other large American city in the last five years. According to this study, biking is up 119% between the fall of 2019 and the spring of 2023.  Other studies have that neighborhood trips have increased substantially during this time period.  The bicycle accident lawyers of Zneimer & Zneimer P.C. have also noted a large increase of clients who were injured while biking.

Though the city has been investing millions of dollars on protected bike lanes and painted bike lanes, riding a bike in Chicago remains treacherous.  Though drivers in Chicago have grown more accustomed to the presence of bikers on the roadways, drivers need to always be vigilant at all times.  On the north side of Chicago in Lincoln Square, for example, the City has recently created painted bike lanes along Lincoln Ave., along Damen Ave. and along Lawrence Ave.  These bike lanes that are just painted on may be beneficial to some degree since they make drivers more aware of the potential presence of bikers, in reality, they offer little protection.  From a drivers perspective, one has to be super careful making a turn into or coming out of any parking lot that cuts across a bike lane.  We are accustomed to only look for cars but now as drivers, we must watch for bikes which are as visible as cars.  That is why it is so important for bikers to have lights on their bikes and to wear bright clothing.  Another particularly dangerous situation is when a driver is approaching an intersection with the intention of making a right turn.  The driver needs to look back into their mirrors and try to turn their heads to see if any bike are coming in the bike lane before crossing the bike lane.  The potential for collision with a bike is high because of the large blind spot on that side of the car.   Night time is an extremely hazardous time for bicyclists.  Without lights and bright, reflective clothing, bikers can be barely visible in the dark. On many occasions I personally have driven up upon bikers dressed in all black with no lights on their bikes and not seeing them until I was very close.