Speed and the Favored Driver/Rider

Washington has a traffic safety priority system. There are “favored” and “disfavored” drivers.

The favored driver has the right of way. The disfavored driver has to yield to the favored driver.

But the rule isn’t absolute. The favored driver has to take reasonable steps to avoid a collision if they notice in time that the disfavored driver is not going to yield.

What we get a lot—especially in wrecks involving motorcycles—is that the favored rider was speeding and that was the reason the disfavored driver didn’t yield.

The burden of proof for this “defense” falls on the disfavored driver. The disfavored driver has to prove:

• It became or should have become apparent to the motorcyclist that the disfavored driver was not going yield;

• The motorcyclist had a reasonable amount of time—between the driver violating his right of way and the time of impact—to perceive that the disfavored driver was going to pull out and not yield to him, decide what action minimized his chances of being run over, and then react to the hazard the driver created; and,

• If the motorcyclist had a reasonable amount of time to perceive, decide, and react, he would have been able to brake before hitting or steer around the disfavored driver’s oncoming vehicle and avoid the crash.

Against that backdrop, the favored rider’s speed is only relevant if—had the rider been traveling slower—he would have had enough time, space, and opportunity to either brake or steer around and avoid the disfavored driver who violated his right of way.

And, even if all that is true, it’s difficult - if not impossible - to conceive of a situation where the favored rider’s speed would make him more at-fault than the disfavored driver who pulled out in front of him.