When a car exits a parking lot and crosses over a sidewalk to do so, what rights does a pedestrian on that sidewalk have? What obligations does the driver have? We have seen many pedestrian accidents caused by a driver's failure to yield the right of way in a situation like this. California Vehicle Code §21804 (Entry onto highway; yield to approaching traffic constituting immediate hazard; yield by approaching traffic) provides, in part:
The driver of any vehicle about to enter or cross a highway from any public or private property, or from an alley,
shall yield the right-of-way to all traffic(traffic" is defined to include pedestrians), as defined in Section 620, approaching the highway close enough to constitute an immediate hazard, and shall continue to yield the right-of-way to that traffic until he or she can proceed with reasonable safety.
California Vehicle Code §21952 (Right-of-way on sidewalk) provides:
The driver of any motor vehicle, prior to driving over or upon any sidewalk, shall yield the right-of-way to any pedestrians approaching thereon.
In short, a driver must yield the right of way to the pedestrian. The following is from a brief involving a young client who was run over by a car leaving a parking lot:
The only issue suggested by counsel for the Defendant is that of comparative negligence. In their mediation brief, Defendants "contend significant comparative fault." The basis for this contention is described as follows:
Plaintiff saw defendant approaching and proceeded to walk in front of defendant's vehicle without making eye contact with the driver. Defendant's Land Rover was to plaintiff's left, and was exiting the parking lot. It appeared to plaintiff the Land Rover was slowing to a stop. Plaintiff testified that she looked at the driver. It appeared to plaintiff that the driver was using a cell phone. (Mrs. Jones was not using a cell phone.) In addition, plaintiff noticed the driver looking toward the driver's left, or away from plaintiff and out the driver's side window. In deposition, plaintiff initially testified she looked at defendant and made eye contact. She later acknowledged that she is not certain she made eye contact. Nevertheless, plaintiff and her friend continued to walk in front of the moving vehicle.
(Defendants' Mediation Brief at pp 1-2)
This description and interpretation of events is flawed, for a number of reasons and does not support any reasonable finding of comparative fault:
First, the contention that Ms. Matsugane walked in front of the car "without making eye contact" is contradicted by counsel's own words ("she is not certain she made eye contact.")
Second, the car was not "exiting the parking lot" at the time Plaintiff saw the car. Rather, it was coming to a stop, which Plaintiff interpreted as a stop to allow her to continue to walk down the sidewalk, a "courtesy" extended to her both as a matter of courtesy and a matter of law.
Third, the fact that Mrs. Smith looked away – and Ms. Matsugane saw her look away – does not mean that Ms. Matsugane sensed any danger. Because the car was nearly stopped when she saw it, and because the driver was apparently "allowing" the pedestrians to walk down the sidewalk, the fact that Ms. Matsugane saw the driver look away does not indicate that Ms. Matsugane was in any way to blame for her injuries. It is totally consistent with her reasonable belief that the car was going to stop and that the driver was preparing to go
after Ms. Matsugane had passed.
Fourth, counsel's description of Ms. Matsugane and her friend "nevertheless" choosing to "walk in front of the moving vehicle" totally ignores the fact that Ms. Matsugane had the right-of-way and was entitled to walk there and, more importantly, had a very reasonable belief that the car was going to let her pass. This reasonable belief is supported by the fact that the car was nearly at a stop and by the fact that Mrs. Smith admits that she first looked to the right (where she saw or should have seen Ms. Matsugane), then to the left (where the traffic representing a potential danger to Mrs. Matsugane was).
This case settled at mediation for a nice sum.
Pete Clancy is an injury attorney in Oakland, CA.