The proposed motorcycle helmet law, Senate Bill 291, has now become law. Governor Rick Snyder announced this decision today, April 13th, 2012.

The new law lessens helmet restrictions allowing motorcycle operators to ride without a helmet provided they are 21 years of age or older, have at least $20,000 of first-party medical benefits insurance coverage, and either have had a motorcycle endorsement for more than two years OR earn a motorcycle endorsement by passing an accredited or certified motorcycle safety course.

A passenger on a motorcycle may ride helmetless under the new law if the passenger is at least 21 years of age and is also covered for at least $20,000 of first-party medical insurance benefits (either by the operator's cycle insurance or their own). So, if you were to ride with a passenger, you may need an additional $20,000 of this medical coverage in addition to the $20,000 you require as the operator.

Proponents of the new law argued that being able to choose whether or not to wear a helmet is a freedom. They also point out that Michigan's tourism industry is presently negatively impacted because riders from our neighboring states do not have to wear a helmet (Indiana, Ohio, Illinois, & Wisconsin) and, therefore, avoid Michigan destinations.

Opponents of the new law argued that statistics report greater head injuries to helmetless riders. These injuries result in an increase in medical costs (to the government and to insurance companies), and a resulting increase in our no-fault insurance rates.

Passing a similar law was attempted twice during Gov. Jennifer Granholm's tenure, but was vetoed on both of the attempts. The present law was sponsored by State Senator Phil Pavlov, R-St. Clair Township. Governor Snyder stated in a news release that, "While many motorcyclists will continue to wear helmets, those who choose not to deserve the latitude to make their own informed judgments."

In an interview with a news reporter, Jason was asked; "How will the new law impact a civil negligence case of a motorcyclist who was not wearing a helmet?"

His answer: I think defense attorneys will argue that not wearing a helmet was unreasonable and that not wearing a helmet was a cause of some injury or severity of injury to the motorcyclist.  If the jury agrees, it would assess a percent of negligence against the motorcyclist and that percentage would be subtracted from the dollar amount awarded by the jury.  If the jury decides that the motorcyclist was more than 50% negligent, the motorcyclist will get no money damages for his or her injury.

Jason Waechter

THE Motorcycle Lawyer sm