Page 10 - May June 2022 CBA Report

Evolution of
Three-Foot Laws
for Passing Cyclists
10
THE REPORT | May/June 2022 | CincyBar.org
Ohio’s Three-Foot Law: R.C. 4511.27
Ohio enacted its Three-Foot Law in 2017. Prior to 2017, Ohio was in the “safe distance” passing law category. Today, Ohio’s Three-Foot Law can be found in Revised Code 4511.27 entitled “Rules Governing Overtaking and Passing of Vehicles.”
The statute’s safe passing standard states: “When a [motorist] overtakes and passes a bicycle or electric bicycle, three feet or greater is considered a safe passing distance.” Contrast this stat- utory language with the United States’ first Three-Foot Law in Wisconsin: “Exercise due care, leaving a safe distance, but in no case less than three (3) feet clearance when passing the bicycle and maintain clearance until safely past the overtaken bicycle.” Wis. Stat. § 346.075. Wisconsin’s three-foot law contains a clear and mandatory minimum. Ohio’s three-foot law invites debate over situations where less than three feet could be “considered” safe.
In fact, the language first submitted by the Ohio Bicycle Feder- ation was tougher, stating that a “safe distance shall not be less than three feet.” However, one legislator held up the passage of the Three-Foot bill until the language was amended to its present state. Current Ohio law states [perhaps less clearly] that a three- foot passing clearance is the minimum distance to be deemed “safe.”
By Chris Carville & Steve Magas
A cyclist always “loses” in a crash with a passing motorist. Absent evidence of a dramatic and sudden swerve or change in direction of the cyclist, the fact that the crash occurred as a car was trying to pass a cyclist is damning evidence that the motorist violated R.C. 4511.27 and there is tremendous value in that. The statute sets up a per se safety standard of a three-foot buffer for passing a cyclist. If a cyclist can reach out and touch any part of a passing vehicle, the vehicle is clearly too close.
Although not explicitly stated, there is also a subtle burden shifting to the motorist to prove his or her pass was made at a safe distance when less than three feet was afforded the cyclist. What we typically find is a suggestion by the motorist that she/he was passing “lawfully” at three feet or more when the cyclist “suddenly swerved” into the side or path of the car. These “suicide swerve” suggestions can often be proved, or disproved, through the testi- mony of an expert in bicycle crash reconstruction.
Tension Between R.C. 4511.27 and 4511.55
AFRAP is short for “As Far Right As Practicable” and is a universal Bike Law term in the United States. Every state has some version of an AFRAP law. Ohio’s Three-Foot Law must be read in conjunction with Ohio’s AFRAP Law for Cyclists, which is found in R.C. 4511.55. Subsection (A) requires that “Every person oper-