What San Diego Car Accident Attorneys Should Know
About Potter and the Pedestrian Right of Way
San Diego personal injury attorneys should be familiar with California Vehicle Code section 21954 and the cases interpreting that code section when they take on the car accident case involving a pedestrian. It is a misnomer in car accident cases that the pedestrian must be within a marked crosswalk in order for there to be liability upon the driver. It is true that section 21954(a) states that a pedestrian must yield the right of way to motorists if they are not in a marked crosswalk. However, subsection (b) to that same section states that subsection (a) does not relive the driver of its duty to use ordinary care for the safety of pedestrians upon the roadway.
One of the first California cases interpreting section 21954 was the appropriately named 1929 decision of Potter v. Driver (1929) 97 Cal.App. 311. Potter was a pedestrian versus car accident case. It is an interesting read and the San Diego accident lawyer should familiarize themself with the Potter case. Potter was crossing the street outside the crosswalk. He looked both ways and saw no cars so he proceeded. He kept looking for cars and saw none until Mr. Driver’s vehicle was upon him causing personal injury.
The court noted section 21954 and stated that it created a reciprocal duty upon both the driver of the automobile and the pedestrian to use ordinary care upon the roadway to avoid car accidents and personal injury. The driver of the automobile has no right to assume the roadway is clear of pedestrians because there are no crosswalks. Both are required to exercise that degree of prudence and car upon the roadway to avoid personal injury.
San Diego personal injury lawyers should not shy away from a car accident case because the pedestrian was outside of the crosswalk. Likewise, the pedestrian in the crosswalk can also be the cause of personal injury. Just like the driver of an automobile must use due care to prevent personal injuries to pedestrians that are not in the crosswalk, the pedestrian is not bullet proof simply by virtue of being in the crosswalk. A pedestrian in the crosswalk against the do not cross light is not using due care. The pedestrian that darts into traffic may likewise not be
using due care even though they darted into traffic while in a crosswalk.
Diligent San Diego car accident attorneys must make good use of the client interview and reviewing all documentation including the police incident report. San Diego car accident attorneys should not shy away from a case because the pedestrian client was not in a crosswalk. Even in light of the somewhat pro-crosswalk drafting and appearance in section 21954, the general rule of Potter is a reciprocal duty of both the driver and the pedestrian. Shepardize the Potter decision and the injury attorney will find that Potter is just the beginning of a line of cases in California that support this reciprocal duty. Just because your pedestrian was outside the crosswalk is no justification for motorists to run them down.
