If you weren’t wearing a helmet, you might be wondering whether that automatically puts you at fault or takes away your ability to file a claim. Insurance companies often lean into that assumption, but the law has a different take.
In Wisconsin, motorcycle helmets are strongly recommended for safety, but they are not legally required for riders who are 18 or older and properly licensed. Even if you were not wearing a helmet, you still have the right to pursue compensation if another driver caused the crash.
If you were injured while riding in Milwaukee, Madison, Appleton, or Green Bay, the focus of your claim is not whether you wore a helmet. It is whether another driver acted carelessly, failed to yield, was distracted, or otherwise caused the collision.
In Wisconsin, motorcycle helmet laws are limited. Riders and passengers under 18 and those riding with an instructional permit are required to wear helmets. For riders 18 and older with a valid license, helmets are optional.
That distinction matters. Choosing not to wear a helmet when you are legally allowed to do so is not, by itself, a violation of the law.
Yes. You can still file a motorcycle accident claim even if you were not wearing a helmet.
The most important question in any motorcycle case is what caused the crash, not what you were wearing. If another driver was speeding, distracted, failed to yield, or simply was not paying attention, you still have the right to pursue compensation for the harm they caused. That can include:
Helmet use does not change whether another driver acted negligently.
This is where things get more nuanced. Wisconsin follows a comparative negligence system. That means fault can be divided, and compensation can be reduced if someone’s actions contributed to their injuries.
In motorcycle cases, insurance companies sometimes argue that not wearing a helmet made injuries worse. For example:
In that situation, the argument is not that the rider caused the accident, but that they share some responsibility for the extent of their injuries. Even then, this does not automatically reduce compensation. It must be proven, and it is often disputed with medical and accident evidence.
Every case is different.
This is why these cases should not be decided by assumptions. They should be evaluated carefully, with facts, timing, medical records, and an understanding of how Wisconsin law is actually applied.
Motorcycle accident claims are already treated differently by insurance companies. When helmet use is added to the conversation, adjusters often push harder to minimize claims early on. At Natasha Misra Law, we focus on what truly matters:
Natasha stays personally involved in motorcycle injury cases, supported by a team with deep experience handling serious auto and motorcycle claims across Wisconsin. We take the time to explain your options clearly, answer your questions honestly, and push back when insurers oversimplify the law.
If you were injured in a motorcycle accident and were not wearing a helmet, do not assume you are out of options. You deserve to understand where you stand before an insurance company decides for you.
Contact us today to schedule a free consultation. Natasha Misra Law serves riders throughout Milwaukee, Madison, Appleton, and Green Bay.
We’re here to help you understand your rights and get back on your feet.
When it comes to personal injury, traffic accidents seem to get the spotlight. However, many accidents occur off the street as well. When property owners fail to reasonably maintain their property and allow dangerous conditions to exist, serious injuries can result. Natasha Misra Law represents victims of slip and fall accidents that involve issues of premises liability.
What is premises liability? In simple terms, if you have been injured in a slip and fall accident or a trip and fall accident caused by a dangerous condition on someone else’s property, then the property owner or occupier may be held responsible for your injuries and losses.
Property owners and people who occupy property have a legal duty to keep their premises in a safe condition and ensure that whoever enters the property is protected from an unreasonable risk of injury.
To prove your slip and fall claim, you must be able to show that the owner or occupier of the property failed to keep the premises in safe condition. In addition, the court will look to your own actions and whether you were on the property legally. The court will also determine whether or not you were exercising reasonable care for your own safety.
A successful slip and fall case will show that the accident was caused by an unsafe condition on the property. Dangerous conditions that create an unreasonable risk of harm, and lead to possible premises liability claims, include:
But just because there was a slip and fall accident caused by one of these conditions does not always mean that the property owner or occupier can be held responsible. The following is often considered in determining whether the owner or occupier of the property can be held responsible for your injuries:
1. Whether the dangerous condition was caused by the owner or occupier of the property,
2. Whether the owner or occupier knew about the dangerous condition but did not fix it, or
3. Whether the owner or occupier should have known about the dangerous condition because a reasonable person maintaining the property would have discovered the dangerous condition and repaired it.
In addition to establishing that a dangerous condition existed, you would also need to prove that you were legally permitted to be on the property at the time of the accident.
Typically, visitors are categorized as either an invitee, a licensee or a trespasser. Invitees are visitors that are invited to the property, such as a general store customer. A licensee is a visitor that enters onto the property for their own purposes, but with the property owner’s consent. Trespassers, on the other hand, do not have consent to be on the property and are not owed the same level of care as invitees and licensees.
If you are in a grocery store during normal operating hours, for example, then you are considered an invitee. As an invitee, the grocery store owes you a duty of care to keep the premises clear of dangerous conditions.
In addition to a negligence claim for your slip and fall, you may also have a claim alleging that the owner of the building or employer violated Wisconsin’s Safe Place Statute. This law covers places of employment and public buildings, and applies to employees and people who frequently visit those locations. The Safe Place Statute holds employers, owners of public buildings, owners of places of employment, and builders responsible for constructing, maintaining and repairing the premises so that it is free of dangerous conditions.
Cases where the Safe Place Statute applies are often easier to prove, as the law holds an employer or the owner of a place of work to a higher standard of care. An experienced personal injury attorney can help you determine if the Wisconsin Safe Place Statute applies to your slip and fall case.
If you have been injured as the result of a dangerous condition on someone else’s property, you should consult with a Milwaukee personal injury attorney today. Slip and fall cases are almost never straightforward and can involve a number of complex premises liability issues. In addition, property owners and occupiers responsible for your injuries will attempt to limit the compensation owed to you. An experienced Milwaukee slip and fall attorney can help you get the compensation you deserve.
Call our office at (414) 635-2858 for a free consultation and speak with a Milwaukee personal injury attorney today.
My law practice is dedicated to helping people who have suffered injuries in accidents which were not their fault. Born and raised in Milwaukee, I come from a family of medical professionals. My background and experience help me understand and represent individuals injured in accidents.
.avif){kind=small}
.avif){kind=small}
.avif){kind=small}
