[nagdu] Washington - Guide dog killed crossing Kennewick street

[Marion Gwizdala]

Albert,
    As you stated, drivers should use "due caution" to avoid striking a 
pedestrian. At the same time, if that pedestrian - whether blind or 
sighted - is crossing against the light and is struck or in any other way 
causes a traffic crash, such a pedestrian may likely be party to a law suit 
to recover damages resulting from the crash. The only thing I see in the 
laws that I have read is that the failure of a blind person to use a cane or 
guide dog cannot be used to assign a portion of the contributory negligence. 
Other than that fact, the negligence of a blind person to observe other laws 
pertaining to safe pedestrian travel can be used to assign a person's 
contribution to the incident that causes the damages being recovered.

Fraternally yours,
Marion Gwizdala

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Albert J Rizzi" <albert at myblindspot.org>
To: "'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'" 
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 3:42 PM
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Washington - Guide dog killed crossing Kennewick street


> No, not unless and until there are audible crossing signs to allow for our
> choice to ignore said signage and then perhaps only then could I see a
> lawyer attempting to make that case. However, an elementary glance at the
> laws as they pertain to pedestrians of all abilities make the drivers
> responsible  for taking all actions to avoid hitting a pedestrian. Now, 
> how
> all that would play out in court should it go that far is only to be 
> decided
> in a court room. But first and foremost, blind or not the laws as written
> require that all drivers yield the right of way to a pedestrian, unless 
> that
> is a specific law includes guidelines pointing out specifically that a
> drivers responsibility is waived if a pedestrian crosses against the 
> light.
> I have yet to see any statute expressly making such a statement. If you 
> can
> find one share it here could make the discussion a little more 
> interesting.
>
> Albert J. Rizzi, M.Ed.
> CEO/Founder
> My Blind Spot, Inc.
> 90 Broad Street - 18th Fl.
> New York, New York  10004
> www.myblindspot.org
> PH: 917-553-0347
> Fax: 212-858-5759
> "The person who says it cannot be done, shouldn't interrupt the one who is
> doing it."
>
>
> Visit us on Facebook LinkedIn
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
> Of Dan Weiner
> Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 3:09 PM
> To: 'NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users'
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Washington - Guide dog killed crossing Kennewick 
> street
>
> , a hypothetical question, guys.
> Now, whether we like to admit it or now, all of us have crossed against 
> the
> light at least once.
> There's no moving traffic, or the cars turn in strange ways or something.
> So, if we cross against the light, but not deliberately in to traffic, 
> what
> would be the implications of that?
> Would you then say that we have partial responsibility?
>
> Dan W. and the big boy, Carter
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nagdu:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspot.
> org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nagdu:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/blind411%40verizon.net