Legal Opinion

Pudmaroff v. Allen

Washington Supreme Court

Decided June 3, 1999No. 66769-1PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTalmadge, J.

— We are asked in this case to determine if a bicyclist is entitled to the protection of the crosswalk when crossing a roadway. We hold a bicyclist using a crosswalk to cross a roadway is entitled to the protection of *58law afforded persons using crosswalks. The trial court here properly granted summary judgment on liability to the bicyclist and exonerated the bicyclist from comparative fault on these facts. We affirm the trial court’s judgment on the verdict of the jury and award fees on appeal to the bicyclist.

ISSUES

1. Do the protections of a crosswalk extend to a bicyclist using the…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Duke v. BoydWashington Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Duke v. BoydWashington Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Wright v. EngumWashington Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Mathis v. AmmonsCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1996
  5. In Re the Marriage of WilliamsWashington Supreme Court · 1990

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Morse v. AntonellisWashington Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Morse v. AntonellisWashington Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Camicia v. Howard S. Wright Construction Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2014
  4. Pudmaroff v. AllenWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  5. Brutsche v. City of KentWashington Supreme Court · 2008

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API