Distracted driving has become a leading cause of bicycle accidents as drivers focus on phones, navigation systems, and other distractions rather than the road. When inattentive drivers strike cyclists, clear negligence supports strong legal claims. Understanding how to prove distraction and maximize recovery helps injured cyclists pursue justice.
The Epidemic of Distracted Driving
Distracted driving kills and injures thousands annually, with cyclists among the most vulnerable victims. Cell phone use is the primary culprit—texting, social media, email, and apps divert attention from driving. Even hands-free phone calls reduce situational awareness.
Other distractions include GPS and navigation systems, eating and drinking while driving, adjusting vehicle controls and entertainment, conversations with passengers, and external distractions like accidents or scenery. Any activity taking a driver's eyes, hands, or mind off driving creates danger.
Why Cyclists Are at Special Risk
Distracted drivers pose extreme dangers to cyclists. Cyclists are smaller and harder to see than vehicles, requiring active visual attention to notice. Cyclists share roadways where distracted drivers veer. Without the protection of vehicle frames and airbags, cyclists suffer severe injuries from collisions.
A distracted driver looking at a phone for just five seconds at 55 mph travels the length of a football field effectively blind. In urban environments where cyclists ride, even brief distraction can be fatal.
Proving Distracted Driving
Evidence of driver distraction strengthens bicycle accident claims significantly. Cell phone records can show calls, texts, or app use at the time of collision. These records may be obtained through subpoenas in litigation.
Witness testimony that the driver was looking down, holding a phone, or otherwise distracted provides direct evidence. The driver's own statements at the scene or to police about what happened may reveal distraction.
Lack of braking evidence (no skid marks, EDR data showing no brake application) suggests the driver never saw the cyclist—consistent with distraction. Crash reconstruction experts can analyze whether an attentive driver should have been able to stop.
Negligence Per Se
Most states have laws prohibiting texting while driving and some ban handheld phone use entirely. Violation of these laws constitutes negligence per se—the legal violation automatically establishes breach of duty.
If phone records prove the driver was texting or using apps when they struck you, liability is effectively established. The case becomes about damages rather than fault.
Impact on Damages
Distracted driving cases may support enhanced damages. Egregious distraction—extended phone use, video watching while driving—may constitute gross negligence or recklessness supporting punitive damages designed to punish and deter such conduct.
Juries often react strongly to evidence that drivers were on phones when they struck vulnerable cyclists. This can increase compensatory damage awards as well.
Building Your Case
Preserve your own evidence: dashcam or bike camera footage, witness contact information, and photographs of the scene. Request the police report and any citations issued.
An attorney can subpoena cell phone records, vehicle EDR data, and other evidence proving distraction. Time-sensitive evidence like phone records requires prompt action to preserve.
If you were struck by a distracted driver, strong evidence of distraction supports maximum compensation for your injuries.