|
In the summer of 2019, plaintiff Clark Alave was riding his
bicycle on a Chicago city street and allegedly hit a large
pothole, causing him to fall and be injured. He sued the city
for damages, saying the city should have maintained the road.
Defending the city in front of the Illinois Supreme Court this
week, attorney Steven Collins said the street wasn’t meant for
bikes.
“The city uses street signs and pavement markings to specify
which of its roadways are intended for bicycle use,” Collins
said. “There were no such signs or markings at the location of
Mr. Alave’s bicycle accident.”
Representing Alave, attorney Erron Fisher said there was a bike
rental station “within throwing distance.”
“With Divvy signs on every single bicycle in their customary
colors,” Fisher said. “What other purpose could putting a
bicycle rental location have at that location other than bicycle
rental?”
Collins said that doesn’t mean people can ride bikes anywhere.
“A person, a Divvy user, is free to ride a Divvy bicycle on any
of the many streets where a bicycle is permitted,” Collins said.
On top of the nearby bike retinal station, Fisher argued the
city promotes itself to cyclists.
“A person who gets on a bike in Chicago does so with all the
advertising and all the notice that Chicago is a bicycle
friendly city,” Fisher said. “They do so with Chicago claiming
to be the most bicycle friendly city in the country.”
Justices took the case under advisement.
|
