After a motorcycle crash, the other side's insurer often turns to one question: were you wearing a helmet? It can come up in a Missouri injury claim, but it is an argument about your injuries, not about who caused the crash.
Updated November 2026
This page is attorney advertising. It offers general information about Missouri law and is not legal or medical advice for your situation. Reading this page or contacting the firm does not create an attorney-client relationship, which is formed only by a written agreement signed by both you and the firm. Any case results described are specific to the facts of those cases; past results do not guarantee, warrant, or predict a similar outcome in any other matter. Finney Injury Law is licensed to practice law in the State of Missouri. The full disclaimer appears at the bottom of this page.
A driver who turns left in front of a motorcycle is the cause of that crash whether or not the rider had a helmet on. The helmet has nothing to do with why the vehicles collided.
Where a helmet can matter is the injury. If the rider has a head injury, an insurer may argue that a helmet would have made it less severe and ask for a reduction. That argument has to be proved, it applies to some injuries and not others, and it is one piece of a much larger claim.
Who caused the collision is decided on the driving: speed, lane position, right of way, distraction. A rider who was hit while stopped or while properly in a lane did nothing to cause the crash by choosing to go without a helmet.
Insurers raise the helmet to argue that head and face injuries would have been less serious. Under Missouri's pure comparative fault system, a successful argument can reduce a recovery rather than eliminate it. It has no bearing on injuries to the legs, arms, spine, or torso.
Missouri's helmet requirements have been revised in recent years and can depend on the rider's age and insurance. A lawyer should look at the requirement that applied on the day of your crash, not a general summary from the internet.
A prompt and well-documented medical record, the police report, witness statements, photographs of the scene and the motorcycle, and preserved helmet and gear if you had them. Gear that was damaged in the crash is evidence of impact and should be kept.
A traumatic brain injury in a motorcycle crash ended a client's planned career in the U.S. Navy. The case settled for $1.25 million.
The result came from documenting what the injury took from the client, not from arguing about the ride.
Past results do not guarantee a future outcome, and every case depends on its own facts. These are public-record results in serious injury cases.
A traumatic brain injury suffered in a motorcycle crash ended a planned career in the U.S. Navy. Read full story →
A professional musician suffered a traumatic brain injury after being struck while crossing the street. The insurer opened at $350,000. Read full story →
A red light runner. Multiple disc replacements, a lower back fusion, and blood clots. A St. Louis County jury returned $10,000,000. Read full story →
Records created right after the crash are the strongest evidence of what the crash did to you. Include any head, neck, or back symptoms even if they seem minor.
Scuffs, cracks, and damage patterns show how you were struck. Do not repair or discard anything until it has been photographed and your lawyer has said it is safe to.
Adjusters ask early because the answer can be used against you. Refer them to your lawyer.
Anything you say on a recording can be used to cut a head injury claim.
The helmet is often the first thing an insurer tries when it wants to pay less. It is easier to answer with a lawyer involved from the start.
Yes. Not wearing a helmet does not stop you from bringing a claim against the driver who caused the crash. The other side may argue it affects your head or face injuries, and that argument can reduce what you recover but does not usually bar the claim.
No. Who caused the crash is decided by how the vehicles were driven. A helmet does not cause a collision, so the helmet question is about the severity of an injury, not who is responsible for the crash.
Generally not. A helmet protects the head, so the argument is limited to head and face injuries. Broken bones, spinal injuries, and road rash are not affected by it.
Under pure comparative fault, a recovery is reduced by the injured person's percentage of fault rather than eliminated. Insurers use it to argue that a rider's choices, including a helmet, should lower the amount they pay.
Look for a firm that tries cases, documents the full cost of serious injuries, and personally reviews your case. Finney Injury Law is a Missouri trial firm and an attorney personally reviews every case. The case review is free.
No. Adjusters ask because the answer can be used to reduce a head injury claim. It is safer to let a lawyer answer, after reviewing the rule that applied on the date of your crash.
No cost, no obligation, and nothing is shared outside our firm. We read every message and respond quickly.
Free case review. An attorney personally reviews every case. English- and Spanish-speaking staff available.