Ohio's New Three-Foot Law Takes Effect Today: What Cyclists and Drivers Need to Know After a Crash

Published March 21, 2017 · New Laws

Starting today, March 21, 2017, an Ohio driver who passes a bicycle has a number to live by: three feet. House Bill 154, which cleared the General Assembly in December after years of work by cycling advocates, is now the law of the road from the Great Miami River trail crossings to the county roads of Greene and Warren counties. I announced the bill's passage in December in Ohio Passes a Three-Foot Passing Law for Cyclists. Today's post is about what the law says and, more to the point, how it changes an injured cyclist's case.

What the statute now says

Ohio's passing statute, R.C. 4511.27(A)(1), has always required a driver overtaking another vehicle to pass "at a safe distance." Until today, the law never said what that meant for a bicycle, and juries were left to guess. H.B. 154 adds one sentence: when a motor vehicle overtakes and passes a bicycle, "three feet or greater is considered a safe passing distance."

A violation is a minor misdemeanor under R.C. 4511.27(B), with stiffer penalties for drivers with recent prior traffic convictions. As WCPO reported ahead of the effective date, each court sets its own fine schedule, so the ticket itself will be modest. The real teeth of the law are in civil cases, which I address below.

The bill also fixed a problem every cyclist in Dayton knows. Traffic signals triggered by in-pavement detectors frequently fail to notice a bicycle, leaving the rider stranded at a red light that will never change. Amended R.C. 4511.132 now treats a signal that fails to detect a bicycle the same as a dark or malfunctioning signal: the cyclist must stop, yield to any traffic that presents an immediate hazard, and may then proceed with ordinary care through the intersection.

Ohio joins the majority

According to WCPO, citing the National Conference of State Legislatures, Ohio becomes roughly the fortieth state with a safe-passing law and among those that specify a distance, with Cincinnati and a few other Ohio cities having already adopted three-foot ordinances on their own. Cycling attorney Steve Magas told the station the law is "not a silver bullet" because passing distances are hard to enforce. He is right about enforcement. He is also right that the law is as much a message to drivers as it is a rule, and messages change behavior over time.

How the three-foot rule helps an injured cyclist

Here is the practical change. Before today, when a car sideswiped a cyclist on Far Hills Avenue, the defense argued that the driver passed at a reasonable distance and the cyclist swerved. Reasonableness was a free-floating argument with no yardstick. Now there is a yardstick.

In Ohio, a driver's violation of a specific safety statute is generally negligence per se, meaning the jury is told the driver was negligent as a matter of law and the only remaining questions are causation and damages. The three-foot sentence is written a little differently from most rules: it says three feet or more "is considered" safe, rather than flatly prohibiting less. Expect defense lawyers to argue that passing at two and a half feet is therefore not automatically a violation. In my judgment that argument will not get them far. A driver who passed closer than the distance the General Assembly has declared safe has, at a minimum, handed the cyclist powerful evidence that the pass was not at a "safe distance" as the statute requires. I explained how Ohio courts treat statutory violations in Negligence Per Se in Ohio: Why Not Every Rule Violation Automatically Wins the Case.

Proof matters, so the evidence we gather in a close-pass case includes:

• Vehicle damage and contact points. A mirror strike, paint transfer on the handlebar, or scuffing on the passenger-side door establishes the pass was far closer than three feet.
• Lane and road measurements. Lane width, the position of the fog line, and the location of debris and the bicycle's rest position let a reconstructionist calculate the passing distance.
• Rider and vehicle cameras. More cyclists ride with cameras every year, and footage of a pass is close to unanswerable.
• Witnesses and the driver's statements. "I thought I had room" is an admission that the driver was judging distance, and judged it wrong.

The intersection change helps, too. A cyclist who stopped at an unresponsive signal, yielded, and was then hit in the intersection is now following the statute, not breaking it, which closes off a favorite comparative-fault argument.

What drivers should know

If you drive, the rule is simple: wait until you can move over, then move over. On a two-lane road that usually means crossing the center line when it is safe to do so, which Ohio's passing rules permit. Three feet is a minimum, not a target, and at highway speeds more is appropriate. A driver who cannot pass with three feet of clearance must slow down and wait, exactly as he would behind a tractor or a mail truck.

What this means for you

If you are a cyclist hit by a passing vehicle on or after today, the three-foot law belongs in your claim from the first demand letter. Make sure the responding officer notes the passing distance and the point of contact, keep the bicycle and your damaged gear exactly as they are, and get the names of every witness. Then call a lawyer who rides, or at least one who understands why "the cyclist came out of nowhere" is almost never true. Our bicycle and scooter injury page covers the other rules that protect riders, and I summarized a cyclist's rights on Ohio roads in Bicycle Crashes: A Cyclist's Rights on Ohio Roads.