The firm congratulates managing partner Peter K. O’Keefe on this dismissal.
Both the motorcyclist and pedestrian were killed. The estate of the motorcyclist brought suit, alleging that the pedestrian improperly crossed the road and failed to keep a proper look out. The defendant effectively limited the testimony of the plaintiff’s accident reconstructionist, Michael A. Cei. The only evidence before the court showed that the accident occurred in the northbound lane, and that the motorcyclist was proceeding southbound.
The court noted further noted that there was no evidence as to which direction the pedestrian was facing when struck, nor whether he was attempting to cross the street. As to the failure to keep a proper look out, the court concludes that there was no evidence from which a fact finder could conclude that there was negligence.
With regard to the alleged failure to utilize a cross walk, the court first concludes that the cross walk statute was not designed to protect motorists but rather pedestrians and therefore could not provide a basis for a negligence per se claim.
The court further holds that even if negligence could be found, evidence of causation is lacking since there was no evidence the decedent was attempting to cross the roadway.
Arcoutte v. Iacobucci, 10/24/14