A driver who strikes a pedestrian rarely says they were not paying attention. They say the pedestrian stepped out unexpectedly, was not in a crosswalk, or was hard to see. A person on foot has no crash structure at all, so the injuries tend to be severe, and the claim tends to start with the driver's version of events.
Updated September 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 vehicle striking a person on foot is one of the most severe collisions on the road, because there is nothing between the pedestrian and the impact. Head injuries, fractures, and internal injuries are the rule rather than the exception.
The claim that follows often turns on a single disputed fact: whether the pedestrian had the right of way, and whether the driver could and should have seen them in time to stop. That fact is provable, with the intersection, the signal timing, and whatever video exists, but it has to be gathered before it disappears.
Missouri law generally requires a driver to yield to a pedestrian who is lawfully in a crosswalk, whether marked or unmarked at an intersection. Drivers frequently dispute whether the pedestrian was actually within the crosswalk's boundaries at the moment of impact, which makes the exact point of the crash worth establishing precisely.
A driver turning right or left across a crosswalk is required to yield to a pedestrian already crossing, and a large share of serious pedestrian crashes happen exactly this way: a driver watching for a gap in traffic rather than watching the crosswalk they are turning across.
“I didn't see them” is the standard explanation in a nighttime pedestrian crash. It is a description of what the driver failed to do, not an excuse for it. Streetlight conditions, headlight range, and vehicle speed all bear on whether a reasonably attentive driver would have had time to react.
Insurers raise a pedestrian's position outside a marked crosswalk to argue comparative fault, sometimes aggressively. Missouri's pure comparative fault rule means that even where a pedestrian bears some responsibility, a driver who failed to keep a careful lookout is not relieved of theirs, and the pedestrian's recovery is reduced rather than eliminated.
A professional musician was crossing the street when he was struck by an SUV. He suffered a traumatic brain injury that reached directly into the faculties his livelihood depended on. The insurance company's opening valuation of that loss was $350,000.
The gap between that number and the real cost was closed with evidence: what the injury actually was, what it had already taken from him, and what it would cost him for the rest of his working life. The case settled for $3.5 million — ten times the opening offer.
An opening number in a pedestrian case is rarely a considered valuation. It is a test of whether anyone is going to do the work to prove otherwise.
The first result below is a pedestrian case. The others are motorcycle and head injury results that share the same dynamic: a person with no protection, a driver's account, and an insurer's opening number that did not survive scrutiny. Past results do not guarantee a future outcome.
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 traumatic brain injury suffered in a motorcycle crash ended a planned career in the U.S. Navy. Read full story →
A young driver ran a red light and caused a serious head injury affecting memory, vision, and quality of life. We secured the full $250,000 policy limit. Read full story →
Traffic cameras, business surveillance, doorbell cameras, and transit cameras are often the only neutral record of who had the right of way. Most retention cycles run days to weeks, so identifying and requesting footage is urgent.
Photograph crosswalk markings, signal heads, and streetlight conditions as close to the time of the crash as possible. Construction, faded markings, or a malfunctioning signal can be repaired or corrected quickly once reported.
Head injuries in pedestrian crashes are common and are not always obvious immediately. A same-day evaluation protects your health and creates a contemporaneous record an insurer cannot later dismiss as an afterthought.
Being outside a marked crosswalk does not automatically bar a claim in Missouri, and it does not excuse a driver who failed to keep a careful lookout. Whether and how much it affects the claim depends on the specific facts.
Not automatically in every circumstance, but Missouri law generally requires drivers to yield to a pedestrian lawfully within a crosswalk, marked or unmarked at an intersection, and to a pedestrian already crossing when a vehicle turns across their path. Whether a pedestrian had the right of way in a specific crash depends on the exact location and circumstances.
It does not automatically end the claim. Missouri follows pure comparative fault, so a pedestrian found partly responsible has their recovery reduced by that percentage rather than barred entirely. A driver's duty to keep a careful lookout and avoid a pedestrian in the roadway does not disappear simply because the pedestrian was outside a marked crosswalk.
No. A driver is required to drive at a speed and with attention that allows them to see and react to conditions actually present, including darkness. “I didn't see them” is generally a description of a driver's own failure to keep a careful lookout rather than a legal excuse, though it is asserted constantly.
Through evidence rather than the driver's account alone: traffic and business camera footage, the physical evidence at the scene, signal timing, and independent witnesses. Because so much of that evidence is perishable, requesting it immediately is one of the most important steps in the entire claim.
Missouri's uninsured motorist coverage requirement generally allows a claim against your own policy when the at-fault driver cannot be identified. It is the same coverage that applies in a hit-and-run involving a vehicle.
Yes. A professional musician was struck by an SUV while crossing the street and suffered a traumatic brain injury. The insurer's opening position was $350,000. Once the lasting effect on his career and daily life was fully documented, the case settled for $3.5 million.
No cost, no obligation, and nothing is shared outside our firm. We read every message and respond quickly.
The decisions you make in the days after an injury affect your ability to recover fair compensation. Free case review. An attorney personally reviews every case. English- and Spanish-speaking staff available.