- Home
- All Practice Areas
- Personal Injury
- What is Personal Injury?
- Personal Injury Statute of Limitations
- Can I Handle My Own Case?
- How Personal Injury Claims Work
- How Our Attorneys Can Help
- Denied Insurance Claims
- Personal Injury Damages
- Premises Liability
- San Antonio Personal Injury Attorney
- Types of Personal Injury
- Burn Injuries
- What is a Personal Injury Lawsuit?
- San Antonio Injury Attorney
- Can I File an Injury Claim?
- Mediating a Personal Injury Case
- The Victim's Duty to Mitigate Damages
- San Antonio Personal Injury Lawyers
- Preponderance of Evidence
- San Antonio Personal Injury Attorneys
- Proving Proximate Cause
- San Antonio Law Firms
- The Thin Skull Rule
- San Antonio Injury Lawyer
- Alternative Dispute Resolution
- San Antonio Injury Law Firm
- Vicarious Liability
- Personal Injury Attorneys in San Antonio
- Subrogation
- Personal Injury Lawyers in San Antonio
- San Antonio Injury Lawyers
- New Braunfels Personal Injury Attorney
- Wrongful Death
- Texas Wrongful Death Law Explained
- Wrongful Death Statute of Limitations
- The Benefits of a Wrongful Death Attorney
- Auto Accident Wrongful Death
- Semi Truck Accident Wrongful Death
- Wrongful Deaths on the Job
- Construction Accident Wrongful Death
- Loss of Future Earnings Compensation
- Texas Wrongful Death Lawyer
- New Braunfels Wrongful Death Lawyer
- Big Rig Accidents
- Texas Truck Accident Attorney
- Commercial Vehicle Accidents
- 18-Wheeler Accident Litigation
- Truck Accident Claims
- Insurance Company Tactics
- Fatal Big Rig Accidents
- Dump Truck Accidents
- Flatbed Trailer Accidents
- Falling Cargo Accidents
- Causes of 18-Wheeler Accidents
- San Antonio 18-Wheeler Accident Attorney
- San Antonio Truck Accident Lawyers
- San Antonio Truck Accident Attorney
- Unsafe Trucking Practices
- San Antonio Trucking Accident Attorney
- San Antonio Texas Trucking Accident Lawyer
- Tractor Trailer Accident Attorney
- Texas Truck Accident Lawyer
- San Antonio Truck Accident Firm
- New Braunfels 18-Wheeler Attorney
- New Braunfels Truck Accident Lawyer
- Automobile Accidents
- San Antonio Auto Accident Lawyer
- Common Car Accident Injuries
- How To File an Accident Injury Claim
- San Antonio Car Accident Lawyer
- Child Injuries in a Car Accident
- Passenger Injuries
- Fatal Car Accidents
- Personal Injury Protection (PIP) Insurance
- Proportionate Responsibility
- Tire Defect Accidents
- San Antonio Rollover Accident Attorney
- The Benefit of Hiring An Attorney
- Challenges Recovering Compensation
- Auto Accident Attorney in San Antonio
- San Antonio Accident Injury Lawyer
- San Antonio Auto Injury Attorney
- Uninsured Motorist Accidents
- San Antonio Accident Attorney
- What To Do After an Accident
- San Antonio Car Wreck Lawyer
- New Braunfels Car Accident Lawyer
- Work Related Accidents
- San Antonio Workers' Comp Lawyer
- Workers Comp Vs Non-Subscriber
- Fatal Workplace Accidents
- Gas & Oil Drilling Accidents
- Lifting Injuries While Working
- Non-Subscriber Injury Law
- What To Expect After a Work Injury
- Oilfield Worker Injury Accidents
- San Antonio Workers Compensation Attorney
- New Braunfels Work Injury Lawyer
- Construction Accidents
- Drunk Driver Accidents
- Other Vehicle Accidents
- Dangerous & Defective Products
- Drowning Accidents
- Day Care Abuse
- Medical Malpractice
- What is Medical Malpractice?
- Filing a Medical Malpractice Claim
- Malpractice Claims & Litigation Process
- Nursing Home Abuse & Neglect
- Misdiagnosis & Faulure to Diagnose
- Pharmacy & Prescription Errors
- Surgical Errors & Mistakes
- Nursing Malpractice
- Dental Malpractice
- Birth Injury
- San Antonio Nursing Home Abuse Attorney
- The Informed Consent Document
- Birth Injury Malpractice
- Drug & Pharmacy Injuries
- Personal Injury
- Our Attorneys
- Success Stories
- Information Center
- Contact
San Antonio Motorcycle Accident Attorney
Texas Injury Attorney Michael Grossman Discusses Motorcycle Accidents

People who are injured in motorcycle accidents often have a number of questions concerning what legal avenues are available to them for seeking compensation. Many people mistakenly believe that motorcycle accidents are just like car accidents from a legal perspective.
Unfortunately, this could not be farther from the truth, and victims often do not realize this until their case is irreparably damaged. But experienced San Antonio motorcycle accident attorney Michael Grossman is here to help you understand what you are up against and why you need help from a legal professional.
Much More Money is on the Line
Due to the nature of motorcycle accidents and the level of protection afforded to motorcyclists, the damages sustained in a motorcycle accident are typically much more severe than those sustained in a typical car accident. The motorcyclist’s vehicle is often totally destroyed, in addition to severe injuries sustained by the motorcyclist. This means that any insurance claim or personal injury lawsuit is going to demand much more money than in a car accident case. When more money is on the line, insurance companies put much more effort into denying your claim. Insurance companies typically assign their most senior adjusters to motorcycle accidents.
These adjusters have an experienced track record denying claims just like yours, and they employ a number of different tactics in order to get you to take the blame for your injuries. Many of their tactics are essentially getting you to admit guilt before you have spoken with an attorney. Insurance adjusters will want to question you immediately concerning your accident. They may have you describe your accident to them, and then they will repeat the details back to you. But they repeat the details in such a way that it sounds like they are saying the same thing you did. But in reality, they are inserting specific legal catchphrases that make you culpable for your accident. They will then use this admission to deny your claim on the basis that you caused your own accident.
Challenges Unique to Motorcyclists
In addition to facing stiff opposition from an insurance company, motorcyclists must battle a number of misconceptions held by insurance companies and juries alike. Studies have shown that the vast majority of motorcycle accidents are caused by other cars simply not noticing motorcycles and their drivers. Motorcycles are much smaller than a passenger car, and when drivers look around them for traffic, they are unconsciously searching for an object approximately the size of a passenger vehicle. When they do not see such an object, they feel that they are no nearby vehicles, even when a motorcyclist is right next to them. Many motorcycle accidents occur in intersections due to this phenomenon. The findings of these studies are further supported by the fact that motorcycles with always-on headlights and motorcyclists who wear bright colors are less often involved in accidents than other motorcyclists.
Despite the findings of these and similar studies, the vast majority of people are under the impression that motorcyclists are reckless, irresponsible drivers, and that if they are hurt in an accident, it must be their own fault. Insurance companies typically approach a motorcycle accident claim under the assumption that the motorcyclist is partially or fully responsible for his or her own injuries – they just need to prove it.
Furthermore, almost any jury will be similarly biased against a motorcyclist. This particularly becomes a problem when proportionate responsibility is involved. In many auto accidents, both drivers are partially liable for the accident. But if a driver is less than 50% liable for his or her injuries, he or she can seek compensation through a lawsuit, even if that driver was partially responsible for the collision. But the proportion of responsibility assigned to each driver is determined by a jury. When proportionate responsibility is combined with a jury’s typical bias against motorcyclists, the result is that juries often assign a much larger percentage of legal responsibility to a motorcyclist than they would to a passenger car driver in similar circumstances. This bias can drastically reduce or even destroy your ability to seek the compensation you need for your damages.
Our Experienced Law Firm can Help You

As you can see, motorcycle accidents can be a legal nightmare for those without extensive experience. Grossman Law Offices has been helping motorcyclists receive compensation for twenty years. We know how to speak the jury’s language, and we have years of experience convincing juries to compensate motorcyclists who are perfectly safe drivers but who were injured due to another person’s negligence. We have successfully litigated and resolved hundreds of high-profile lawsuits against every major insurance carrier in the country. These carriers are aware of our highly successful history, and they often cooperate with our demands for a settlement without even taking a case to court, simply because they do not want to fight our attorneys in a trial. This means that we can often secure a fair settlement for you extremely quickly. We are dedicated to getting you back on your feet as quickly as possible so that you may get on with your life. So if you or someone in your family has been injured in a motorcycle accident, contact aggressive San Antonio motorbike wreck lawyer Michael Grossman today, and make sure you get the compensation you need and the justice that is rightfully yours.
Some of Our Most Recent Successful Cases
$350,000.00 Recovery - Wrongful Death / First Party Dram Shop
Our firm was hired by the minor child and parents of a young man who was killed in a motorcycle accident after being over served alcohol at a South Padre Island bar. The plaintiffs hired our firm to investigate the claim on the basis that the decedent was over the legal limit at the time of his death. In initial attempts to settle the case out of court, the defendants denied liability. Suit was filed soon thereafter.
The defendants initially argued that the decedent never consumed alcohol on their premises. Through physical evidence and deposition testimony to the contrary, we were able to conclusively prove that the decedent had indeed been drinking at the establishment.
The defendants then asserted allegations that the decedent's minor child was not actually his biological child, which would bar his claim entirely. A DNA test was performed and this argument was defeated.
The defendants then asserted the safe harbor defense. Our attorneys argued that the defendants did not qualify for safe harbor protection due to the fact that their servers were not all licensed providers. However, while this element was being addressed, our attorneys focused their attention on addressing the second element of the safe harbor defense regarding the bar's encouragement of the over service of alcohol. The defendants claimed that they would never serve the double-shot Bacardi cocktails that witnesses claimed the decedent drank several of. We sent private investigators into the bar to order the same drinks that the decedent consumed on the night of his death and the very same bar tenders who over served the decedent, without hesitation, served copious amounts of alcohol to the investigators, all of which was captured on hidden camera.
Once the safe harbor defense was defeated, the defendants argued that the decedent's BAC was low enough at the time of his death (as recorded by the hospital) that he would not have necessarily appeared obviously intoxicated to the servers and therefore the bar should not be held liable even if he had been over served. Eyewitness testimony refuted this.
Additionally, our firm's testifying medical expert reviewed the medical records related to the emergency helicopter flight that transported the decedent to the hospital after his accident. She determined that the EMS technicians administered numerous blood transfusions while in flight. Armed with this newfound data, our medical expert reverse extrapolated and determined conclusively that the decedent's BAC was actually in the range of .19-.21 at the time of the accident, though it was drastically diluted by the time he arrived at the hospital, which accounted for the relatively low BAC found in the hospital's medical records. This testimony proved to be pivotal in the case, resulting in a successful recovery for our clients.
Our firm was hired by the minor child and parents of a young man who was killed in a motorcycle accident after being over served alcohol at a South Padre Island bar. The plaintiffs hired our firm to investigate the claim on the basis that the decedent was over the legal limit at the time of his death. In initial attempts to settle the case out of court, the defendants denied liability. Suit was filed soon thereafter.
The defendants initially argued that the decedent never consumed alcohol on their premises. Through physical evidence and deposition testimony to the contrary, we were able to conclusively prove that the decedent had indeed been drinking at the establishment.
The defendants then asserted allegations that the decedent's minor child was not actually his biological child, which would bar his claim entirely. A DNA test was performed and this argument was defeated.
The defendants then asserted the safe harbor defense. Our attorneys argued that the defendants did not qualify for safe harbor protection due to the fact that their servers were not all licensed providers. However, while this element was being addressed, our attorneys focused their attention on addressing the second element of the safe harbor defense regarding the bar's encouragement of the over service of alcohol. The defendants claimed that they would never serve the double-shot Bacardi cocktails that witnesses claimed the decedent drank several of. We sent private investigators into the bar to order the same drinks that the decedent consumed on the night of his death and the very same bar tenders who over served the decedent, without hesitation, served copious amounts of alcohol to the investigators, all of which was captured on hidden camera.
Once the safe harbor defense was defeated, the defendants argued that the decedent's BAC was low enough at the time of his death (as recorded by the hospital) that he would not have necessarily appeared obviously intoxicated to the servers and therefore the bar should not be held liable even if he had been over served. Eyewitness testimony refuted this.
Additionally, our firm's testifying medical expert reviewed the medical records related to the emergency helicopter flight that transported the decedent to the hospital after his accident. She determined that the EMS technicians administered numerous blood transfusions while in flight. Armed with this newfound data, our medical expert reverse extrapolated and determined conclusively that the decedent's BAC was actually in the range of .19-.21 at the time of the accident, though it was drastically diluted by the time he arrived at the hospital, which accounted for the relatively low BAC found in the hospital's medical records. This testimony proved to be pivotal in the case, resulting in a successful recovery for our clients.
Total Recovery:
$350,000.00
$350,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$140,000.00
$140,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$40,000.00
$40,000.00
$125,055.00 Recovery - Automobile Accident (Back Injury Requiring Surgery)
Recovery for client who suffered a back injury resulting in surgery in a car accident.
Recovery for client who suffered a back injury resulting in surgery in a car accident.
Total Recovery:
$125,055.00
$125,055.00
Attorney Fees:
$41,684.00
$41,684.00
Litigation Expenses:
$435.00
$435.00
$100,000.00 Recovery - Motorcycle Accident (Neck, Back, and Knee Injury)
Recovery for a client who suffered neck, back, and knee injuries in a motor cycle accident.
Recovery for a client who suffered neck, back, and knee injuries in a motor cycle accident.
Total Recovery:
$100,000.00
$100,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$33,333.00
$33,333.00
Litigation Expenses:
$627.00
$627.00
$93,000.00 Recovery - Motorcycle Accident (Soft-Tissue Injuries and Abrasions)
Recovered for victim of motorcycle accident who suffered soft tissue injuries and abrasions.
Recovered for victim of motorcycle accident who suffered soft tissue injuries and abrasions.
Total Recovery:
$93,000.00
$93,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$31,000.00
$31,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$181.00
$181.00
$200,000.00 Recovery - Commercial Vehicle Accident (Back Injury Requiring Surgery)
Recovery for motorcyclist who suffered a back injury in an 18-wheeler accident.
Recovery for motorcyclist who suffered a back injury in an 18-wheeler accident.
Total Recovery:
$200,000.00
$200,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$80,000.00
$80,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$5,709.00
$5,709.00
$97,500.00 Recovery - Wrongful Death / First-Party Dram Shop Accident
(policy limits were $100k) Recovery for wife of a motorcyclist who was killed in a drunk driving accident.
(policy limits were $100k) Recovery for wife of a motorcyclist who was killed in a drunk driving accident.
Total Recovery:
$97,500.00
$97,500.00
Attorney Fees:
$48,750.00
$48,750.00
Litigation Expenses:
$0.00
$0.00
$100,000.00 Recovery - Motorcycle Accident (Broken Femur)
(policy limits) Recovery for victim who sustained a broken femur in a motorcycle accident.
(policy limits) Recovery for victim who sustained a broken femur in a motorcycle accident.
Total Recovery:
$100,000.00
$100,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$33,000.00
$33,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$0.00
$0.00
$350,000.00 Recovery - Product Liability (Back Injury Resulting in Surgery)
A young woman suffered a back injury that required corrective surgery following a boating accident. The boat in question sped out of control and crashed into a landmass, throwing our client from the boat, as the result of a stuck throttle. Upon inspection of the boat, it was determined that a poor design led to the malfunction and a product liability lawsuit was brought against the manufacturer. The defendants argued that the boat was inappropriately piloted, however, the physical evidence depicted the cause of the accident quite clearly and the case was successfully resolved.
A young woman suffered a back injury that required corrective surgery following a boating accident. The boat in question sped out of control and crashed into a landmass, throwing our client from the boat, as the result of a stuck throttle. Upon inspection of the boat, it was determined that a poor design led to the malfunction and a product liability lawsuit was brought against the manufacturer. The defendants argued that the boat was inappropriately piloted, however, the physical evidence depicted the cause of the accident quite clearly and the case was successfully resolved.
Total Recovery:
$350,000.00
$350,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$100,000.00
$100,000.00
Litigation Expenses:
$100.00
$100.00
$475,000.00 Recovery - Commercial Vehicle Accident / Motorcycle Accident (Shoulder Injury Requiring Surgery)
An airline pilot suffered a shoulder injury resulting in surgery when he was sideswiped by an 18-wheeler. The case was resolved through litigation, as establishing liability was a contentious matter. The defendants claimed that the plaintiff made an illegal passing maneuver, but the evidence showed that the defendant made a sweeping turn and intruded upon our client's right of way.
An airline pilot suffered a shoulder injury resulting in surgery when he was sideswiped by an 18-wheeler. The case was resolved through litigation, as establishing liability was a contentious matter. The defendants claimed that the plaintiff made an illegal passing maneuver, but the evidence showed that the defendant made a sweeping turn and intruded upon our client's right of way.
Total Recovery:
$475,000.00
$475,000.00
Attorney Fees:
$158,333.00
$158,333.00
Litigation Expenses:
$5,000.00
$5,000.00



