- Home
- Informative Articles
- Texas Motorcycle Accident Attorney
- Houston Motorcycle Accident Lawyer
- Austin Motorcycle Accident Attorney
- San Antonio Motorcycle Accident Attorney
- Fort Worth Motorcycle Accident Attorney
- El Paso Motorcycle Accident Lawyer
- Denton Motorcycle Accident Attorney
- Lubbock Motorcycle Accident Lawyer
- Midland Motorcycle Accident Lawyer
- Texarkana Motorcycle Accident Lawyer
- McAllen Motorcycle Accident Attorney
- Waco Motorcycle Accident Lawyer
- Tyler Motorcycle Accident Attorney
- Abilene Motorcycle Accident Attorney
- Wichita Falls Motorcycle Accident Attorney
- Beaumont Motorcycle Accident Lawyer
- Amarillo Motorcycle Accident Lawyer
- Corpus Christi Motorcycle Accident Attorney
- Dallas Motorcycle Accident Lawyer
- Laredo Motorcycle Accident Lawyer
- Texas ATV Accident Attorney
- Texas Biker Accident Lawyer
- Texas Defective Motorcycle Attorney
- Texas Drunk Driver Motorcycle Accident Attorney
- Texas Drunk Motorcyclist Attorney
- Texas Motorcycle Accident Law Firm
- Texas Motorcycle Drunk Driving Lawyer
- How do Motorcycle Accidents Happen?
- Motorcycle Accident Injuries
- Motorcycle Helmet Safety
- Motorcycle Insurance Policies
- Texas 18-Wheeler Motorcycle Accident Lawyer
- Texas Motorcycle Accident Law
- Texas Motorcycle Accident Statistics
- Texas Motorcycle Helmet Law
- Texas Motorcycle Accident Attorney
- Our Attorneys
- Our Successes
- Info Center
- Contact Us
I was involved in a serious personal injury accident. Mr. Grossman's experience and aggressiveness in handling my case resulted in a great settlement!
-
E. McClure
Commercial Vehicle Accident Case
Motorcycle Helmet Safety
Texas Motorcycle Lawyer Michael Grossman Discusses Motorcycle Helmet Safety in Texas
In 2008, the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration reported that the lives of 1,829 motorcyclists were saved due to the use of a helmet. Had all motorcyclists involved in fatal motorcycle accidents that year worn helmets, the NHTSA estimated that another 823 lives of motorcyclists could have been saved. This stark statistic speaks to the seriousness of motorcycle helmet safety and why every motorcyclist must give proper consideration to the usage of a motorcycle helmet.
20 states require motorcyclists to wear helmets. 27 states only require certain motorcyclists, such as those under 21, to wear helmets. Three states have no motorcycle helmet laws at all. This apparent discrepancy between the states in regards to motorcycle helmet safety speaks to the contentious nature of these laws. Many motorcyclists feel that they ought to be given the choice as to whether or not they have to wear a helmet while riding their hog. Many others feel that the dangers of riding without a helmet outweigh the motorcyclists’ choice, so they’d rather have the government mandate that all riders wear helmets. Consequently, motorcycle helmet safety laws have seen many variations over the years, and further changes in state law across the country will likely be experienced in the future.
However, the use of a helmet can greatly mitigate the opportunities for severe injury or death to occur to a motorcycle rider or motorcycle passenger involved in an accident. Due to their lack of safety features in comparison to a passenger vehicle, motorcycles provide little protection to their riders. Motorcyclists have a 35% greater opportunity of experiencing a fatal accident in comparison to a passenger vehicle driver per vehicle mile traveled. Since even a low-speed motorcycle accident can result in a rider being thrown to the ground or ejected from their motorcycle, a head injury is an unfortunate but highly common result of a motorcycle wreck. The NHTSA reported that motorcycle helmets are 37% effective in preventing rider fatalities, and 41% effective in preventing passenger fatalities. Additionally, from 2008 to 2009, states that require the use of a helmet saw an increase in helmet usage, from 78% to 86%.
Motorcycle helmet safety is an important issue for every motorcyclist to consider before getting out onto the open road, especially in states that do not require adult motorcycle drivers to wear helmets. The use of such a helmet could prevent brain damage, disfigurement, a severe head injury, or death.
Some of Our Most Recent Successful Cases
$100,000.00 Recovery - Motorcycle Accident (Broken Femur)
(policy limits) Recovery for victim who sustained a broken femur in a motorcycle accident.
(policy limits) Recovery for victim who sustained a broken femur in a motorcycle accident.
Total Recovery:
$100,000.00
$100,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$33,000.00
$33,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$0.00
$0.00
$125,055.00 Recovery - Automobile Accident (Back Injury Requiring Surgery)
Recovery for client who suffered a back injury resulting in surgery in a car accident.
Recovery for client who suffered a back injury resulting in surgery in a car accident.
Total Recovery:
$125,055.00
$125,055.00
Attorney Fees:
$41,684.00
$41,684.00
Litigation Expenses:
$435.00
$435.00
$350,000.00 Recovery - Product Liability (Back Injury Resulting in Surgery)
A young woman suffered a back injury that required corrective surgery following a boating accident. The boat in question sped out of control and crashed into a landmass, throwing our client from the boat, as the result of a stuck throttle. Upon inspection of the boat, it was determined that a poor design led to the malfunction and a product liability lawsuit was brought against the manufacturer. The defendants argued that the boat was inappropriately piloted, however, the physical evidence depicted the cause of the accident quite clearly and the case was successfully resolved.
A young woman suffered a back injury that required corrective surgery following a boating accident. The boat in question sped out of control and crashed into a landmass, throwing our client from the boat, as the result of a stuck throttle. Upon inspection of the boat, it was determined that a poor design led to the malfunction and a product liability lawsuit was brought against the manufacturer. The defendants argued that the boat was inappropriately piloted, however, the physical evidence depicted the cause of the accident quite clearly and the case was successfully resolved.
Total Recovery:
$350,000.00
$350,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$100,000.00
$100,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$100.00
$100.00
$200,000.00 Recovery - Commercial Vehicle Accident (Back Injury Requiring Surgery)
Recovery for motorcyclist who suffered a back injury in an 18-wheeler accident.
Recovery for motorcyclist who suffered a back injury in an 18-wheeler accident.
Total Recovery:
$200,000.00
$200,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$80,000.00
$80,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$5,709.00
$5,709.00
$350,000.00 Recovery - Wrongful Death / First Party Dram Shop
Our firm was hired by the minor child and parents of a young man who was killed in a motorcycle accident after being over served alcohol at a South Padre Island bar. The plaintiffs hired our firm to investigate the claim on the basis that the decedent was over the legal limit at the time of his death. In initial attempts to settle the case out of court, the defendants denied liability. Suit was filed soon thereafter.
The defendants initially argued that the decedent never consumed alcohol on their premises. Through physical evidence and deposition testimony to the contrary, we were able to conclusively prove that the decedent had indeed been drinking at the establishment.
The defendants then asserted allegations that the decedent's minor child was not actually his biological child, which would bar his claim entirely. A DNA test was performed and this argument was defeated.
The defendants then asserted the safe harbor defense. Our attorneys argued that the defendants did not qualify for safe harbor protection due to the fact that their servers were not all licensed providers. However, while this element was being addressed, our attorneys focused their attention on addressing the second element of the safe harbor defense regarding the bar's encouragement of the over service of alcohol. The defendants claimed that they would never serve the double-shot Bacardi cocktails that witnesses claimed the decedent drank several of. We sent private investigators into the bar to order the same drinks that the decedent consumed on the night of his death and the very same bar tenders who over served the decedent, without hesitation, served copious amounts of alcohol to the investigators, all of which was captured on hidden camera.
Once the safe harbor defense was defeated, the defendants argued that the decedent's BAC was low enough at the time of his death (as recorded by the hospital) that he would not have necessarily appeared obviously intoxicated to the servers and therefore the bar should not be held liable even if he had been over served. Eyewitness testimony refuted this.
Additionally, our firm's testifying medical expert reviewed the medical records related to the emergency helicopter flight that transported the decedent to the hospital after his accident. She determined that the EMS technicians administered numerous blood transfusions while in flight. Armed with this newfound data, our medical expert reverse extrapolated and determined conclusively that the decedent's BAC was actually in the range of .19-.21 at the time of the accident, though it was drastically diluted by the time he arrived at the hospital, which accounted for the relatively low BAC found in the hospital's medical records. This testimony proved to be pivotal in the case, resulting in a successful recovery for our clients.
Our firm was hired by the minor child and parents of a young man who was killed in a motorcycle accident after being over served alcohol at a South Padre Island bar. The plaintiffs hired our firm to investigate the claim on the basis that the decedent was over the legal limit at the time of his death. In initial attempts to settle the case out of court, the defendants denied liability. Suit was filed soon thereafter.
The defendants initially argued that the decedent never consumed alcohol on their premises. Through physical evidence and deposition testimony to the contrary, we were able to conclusively prove that the decedent had indeed been drinking at the establishment.
The defendants then asserted allegations that the decedent's minor child was not actually his biological child, which would bar his claim entirely. A DNA test was performed and this argument was defeated.
The defendants then asserted the safe harbor defense. Our attorneys argued that the defendants did not qualify for safe harbor protection due to the fact that their servers were not all licensed providers. However, while this element was being addressed, our attorneys focused their attention on addressing the second element of the safe harbor defense regarding the bar's encouragement of the over service of alcohol. The defendants claimed that they would never serve the double-shot Bacardi cocktails that witnesses claimed the decedent drank several of. We sent private investigators into the bar to order the same drinks that the decedent consumed on the night of his death and the very same bar tenders who over served the decedent, without hesitation, served copious amounts of alcohol to the investigators, all of which was captured on hidden camera.
Once the safe harbor defense was defeated, the defendants argued that the decedent's BAC was low enough at the time of his death (as recorded by the hospital) that he would not have necessarily appeared obviously intoxicated to the servers and therefore the bar should not be held liable even if he had been over served. Eyewitness testimony refuted this.
Additionally, our firm's testifying medical expert reviewed the medical records related to the emergency helicopter flight that transported the decedent to the hospital after his accident. She determined that the EMS technicians administered numerous blood transfusions while in flight. Armed with this newfound data, our medical expert reverse extrapolated and determined conclusively that the decedent's BAC was actually in the range of .19-.21 at the time of the accident, though it was drastically diluted by the time he arrived at the hospital, which accounted for the relatively low BAC found in the hospital's medical records. This testimony proved to be pivotal in the case, resulting in a successful recovery for our clients.
Total Recovery:
$350,000.00
$350,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$140,000.00
$140,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$40,000.00
$40,000.00
$100,000.00 Recovery - Motorcycle Accident (Neck, Back, and Knee Injury)
Recovery for a client who suffered neck, back, and knee injuries in a motor cycle accident.
Recovery for a client who suffered neck, back, and knee injuries in a motor cycle accident.
Total Recovery:
$100,000.00
$100,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$33,333.00
$33,333.00
Litigation Expenses:
$627.00
$627.00
$93,000.00 Recovery - Motorcycle Accident (Soft-Tissue Injuries and Abrasions)
Recovered for victim of motorcycle accident who suffered soft tissue injuries and abrasions.
Recovered for victim of motorcycle accident who suffered soft tissue injuries and abrasions.
Total Recovery:
$93,000.00
$93,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$31,000.00
$31,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$181.00
$181.00
$97,500.00 Recovery - Wrongful Death / First-Party Dram Shop Accident
(policy limits were $100k) Recovery for wife of a motorcyclist who was killed in a drunk driving accident.
(policy limits were $100k) Recovery for wife of a motorcyclist who was killed in a drunk driving accident.
Total Recovery:
$97,500.00
$97,500.00
Attorney Fees:
$48,750.00
$48,750.00
Litigation Expenses:
$0.00
$0.00
$475,000.00 Recovery - Commercial Vehicle Accident / Motorcycle Accident (Shoulder Injury Requiring Surgery)
An airline pilot suffered a shoulder injury resulting in surgery when he was sideswiped by an 18-wheeler. The case was resolved through litigation, as establishing liability was a contentious matter. The defendants claimed that the plaintiff made an illegal passing maneuver, but the evidence showed that the defendant made a sweeping turn and intruded upon our client's right of way.
An airline pilot suffered a shoulder injury resulting in surgery when he was sideswiped by an 18-wheeler. The case was resolved through litigation, as establishing liability was a contentious matter. The defendants claimed that the plaintiff made an illegal passing maneuver, but the evidence showed that the defendant made a sweeping turn and intruded upon our client's right of way.
Total Recovery:
$475,000.00
$475,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$158,333.00
$158,333.00
Litigation Expenses:
$5,000.00
$5,000.00










In Our Clients' Words