Missouri
Motorcycle Accident Laws in Missouri (2026): Helmets
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited September 14, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 18, 2026. · 7 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
A motorcycle crash in Missouri is handled as a personal injury case, but riders face questions a car driver does not: who has to wear a helmet, whether going without one can affect a damages award, and whether weaving between lanes is allowed. Missouri changed its helmet rule in 2020, so the answer is no longer a simple yes or no, and that makes the rider-specific rules worth understanding. Over all of this sit the two rules that decide every injury case, the deadline to sue and how shared fault affects recovery.
This page explains both the general tort rules and the motorcycle-specific variables in Missouri. It is general legal information and attorney advertising, not legal advice, and outcomes turn on the specific facts, so confirm how the law applies with a licensed Missouri attorney.
Statute of Limitations in Missouri
Under RSMo 516.120, an action for an injury to the person or rights of another not arising on contract must be commenced within five years. For a motorcycle crash, that clock generally starts on the date of the collision, and five years is notably longer than the two- or three-year window in most states. Even so, missing the deadline almost always ends the case, so confirming the date early is essential and there is no benefit to waiting.
A few situations can change the deadline. A minor's time is generally tolled until age 18, and legal incapacity can pause the clock. Claims against a public entity can carry shorter notice requirements, and a medical-negligence claim related to the treatment of crash injuries has its own two-year limit under RSMo 516.105. Because these are fact-specific, confirm your exact deadline with a licensed attorney.
Wrongful Death in Missouri
When a motorcycle crash causes death, the claim proceeds under Missouri's wrongful death act, RSMo 537.080, brought by the statutory class of beneficiaries such as a surviving spouse, children, or parents. The deadline is three years from the date of death under RSMo 537.100, which is shorter than the five-year injury limitation, so a family should not assume the longer injury period applies to a death claim.
Negligence Rule: Pure Comparative Fault
Missouri uses pure comparative fault, which the Missouri Supreme Court adopted in Gustafson v. Benda, 661 S.W.2d 11 (Mo. 1983). Under that rule, each party is assigned a percentage of fault, and the injured rider's recovery is reduced by that percentage. Because the rule is pure, a rider can recover even if found mostly at fault; there is no 50 percent or 51 percent cutoff. A rider found 80 percent at fault may still recover the remaining 20 percent of proven damages.
For riders, comparative fault means the defense will try to assign as much blame as possible to the rider's own conduct, such as speed or lane position, to shrink the recovery. There is also a documented bias against motorcyclists among some jurors and adjusters, which is one more reason to document that the rider was operating lawfully.
No-Fault and PIP
Missouri is not a no-fault state. It uses a traditional at-fault (tort) system and does not require PIP. The driver who caused the crash, and that driver's insurer, is responsible for the harm, and there is no statutory injury threshold a rider must clear before suing. A seriously injured rider pursues the at-fault driver directly and may also rely on their own uninsured or underinsured-motorist coverage if the at-fault driver lacks adequate insurance.
Helmet Law: Partial Since 2020
Missouri loosened its helmet law effective August 28, 2020. Under RSMo 302.020, every operator and passenger under 26 must wear protective headgear at all times the vehicle is in motion, and any rider operating under an instruction permit must wear one regardless of age. RSMo 302.026 then allows a rider 26 or older to go without a helmet only if that rider carries proof of financial responsibility under chapter 303 and a health-insurance policy or other coverage that will provide medical benefits for injuries from a motorcycle crash. In short, helmets remain mandatory for younger and permitted riders, and they are optional for older riders only when the insurance conditions are met. The statute also provides that no one may be stopped solely to check helmet compliance.
Helmet Non-Use as Evidence
Where an adult rider was legally entitled to ride without a helmet, the helmet question becomes a damages issue rather than a question of breaking the law. Under Missouri's pure comparative-fault framework, a defendant may argue that the rider's choice to ride without a helmet increased the severity of a head injury and ask to reduce damages on a causation or mitigation theory. Notably, Missouri's seat-belt evidence statute, RSMo 307.178, which sharply limits how non-use can reduce damages, defines passenger car to exclude motorcycles, so that protective limit does not shield a rider. The argument still turns on causation, since a helmet protects the head, not road rash, orthopedic, or internal injuries, and a defendant typically needs expert proof that a helmet would have changed the outcome.
Lane Splitting and Lane Filtering
Missouri does not permit lane splitting or lane filtering. There is no statute authorizing a motorcycle to ride between lanes of stopped or moving traffic, and ordinary lane-use rules requiring a vehicle to stay within a single marked lane apply to motorcycles. A rider who was splitting lanes at the time of a crash can expect the defense to raise it on the question of fault.
Damage Caps and State Insurance
Missouri does not cap most personal-injury damages. Compensatory damages for ordinary motor-vehicle injury claims, including medical bills, lost income, and pain and suffering, are not subject to a general statutory cap. A statutory cap on noneconomic damages applies mainly in medical-malpractice actions, and punitive damages are limited by statute, but those limits do not apply to a typical motorcycle-crash claim against an at-fault driver.
For coverage context, Missouri's minimum auto-liability requirement is 25/50/25: $25,000 per person and $50,000 per accident for bodily injury, and $25,000 for property damage, as administered by the Missouri Department of Revenue, along with required uninsured-motorist coverage. The same minimums apply to motorcycles. Because serious motorcycle injuries can far exceed a minimum policy, a rider's own underinsured-motorist coverage is often important.
Why a Motorcycle Case Is Different
A motorcycle crash is rarely minor. With far less protection than a car, riders suffer more severe injuries, which means higher medical costs and a more aggressive insurance defense. Missouri cases also carry rider-specific questions, the partial helmet law and any helmet-causation argument, the absence of legal lane splitting, and how pure comparative fault is allocated, all set against a documented bias toward riders that makes proof of lawful conduct central.
Preserving Evidence and How to Evaluate Your Options
If you or a family member was hurt in a motorcycle crash, get medical care and keep the records, obtain the police crash report, photograph the scene, the bike, and your gear, and note the other driver's information and any witnesses. Whether the five-year injury window or the three-year death window applies, have a Missouri motorcycle accident lawyer confirm the deadline in a free claim review and lock down the early evidence (attorney advertising).
Many motorcycle accident attorneys offer a free consultation and work on a contingency basis, meaning no upfront fee and payment only out of any recovery. No attorney can promise an outcome or a dollar amount, and only a licensed Missouri attorney can assess your specific facts within the deadline. None of this is legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the deadline to sue after a motorcycle accident in Missouri?
Generally five years from the date of the crash for an injury claim under RSMo 516.120, one of the longer deadlines in the country. A wrongful-death claim is shorter at three years from the date of death under RSMo 537.100, and claims against a government entity can be shorter still, so confirm your exact deadline with a licensed Missouri attorney.
Is failing to wear a helmet going to hurt my case in Missouri?
Possibly. Since 2020, riders 26 and older may ride without a helmet if they carry the required insurance (RSMo 302.026), while younger and permitted riders must wear one (RSMo 302.020). Where a rider was legally helmetless, a defendant may argue under comparative fault that it worsened a head injury and ask to reduce damages. The seat-belt evidence limit (RSMo 307.178) does not apply because it excludes motorcycles, and the argument still turns on causation.
Is lane splitting legal in Missouri?
No. Missouri does not permit lane splitting or lane filtering. There is no statute allowing a motorcycle to ride between lanes of stopped or moving traffic, and ordinary lane-use rules apply, so splitting lanes can be used by the defense on the question of fault.
How does Missouri's comparative fault rule affect a motorcycle case?
Missouri uses pure comparative fault, adopted in Gustafson v. Benda. Your recovery is reduced by your percentage of fault, but you can still recover even if you were mostly at fault, because there is no percentage bar. The defense will try to assign as much fault as possible to the rider to shrink the award.
Is Missouri a no-fault state for motorcycle accidents?
No. Missouri is an at-fault (tort) state and does not require PIP, so you pursue the at-fault driver and that driver's insurer directly. The state minimum liability coverage is 25/50/25 with required uninsured-motorist coverage, and your own underinsured-motorist coverage may matter for a serious injury.
How much is a motorcycle accident case worth?
There is no fixed value. Compensation depends on the injuries, the evidence, the comparative-fault analysis, and the available insurance. Missouri does not cap most injury damages outside medical-malpractice cases, but every case turns on its own facts, and no attorney can promise an outcome or a dollar amount.
Updates
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Revised Statutes of Missouri, Title XXXVI (STATUTORY ACTIONS AND TORTS), Chapter 537
§ 537.055Operation of a motorcycle not evidence of comparative negligence.In force
In any action to recover damages arising out of the ownership, common maintenance, or operation of a motor vehicle, the fact that one of the parties was operating a motorcycle shall not, in and of itself, be considered evidence of comparative negligence.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-14 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at revisor.mo.gov
§ 537.080Action for wrongful death — who may sue — limitation.In forcecited in 3 of our articles
1. Whenever the death of a person results from any act, conduct, occurrence, transaction, or circumstance which, if death had not ensued, would have entitled such person to recover damages in respect thereof, the person or party who, or the corporation which, would have been liable if death had not ensued shall be liable in an action for damages, notwithstanding the death of the person injured, which damages may be sued for: (1) By the spouse or children or the surviving lineal descendants of any deceased children, natural or adopted, legitimate or illegitimate, or by the father or mother of the deceased, natural or adoptive; (2) If there be no persons in class (1) entitled to bring the action, then by the brother or sister of the deceased, or their descendants, who can establish his or her right to those damages set out in section 537.090 because of the death; (3) If there be no persons in class (1) or (2) entitled to bring the action, then by a plaintiff ad litem. Such plaintiff ad litem shall be appointed by the court having jurisdiction over the action for damages provided in this section upon application of some person entitled to share in the proceeds of such…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-06 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at revisor.mo.gov
Cited in 246 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Stiffelman v. Abrams (Supreme Court of Missouri 1983, 655 S.W.2d 522)“…f injury and time of death. Laws of 1979, S.B. 368, p. 630 (§ 537.080, RSMo 1982 Supp.). In the case at bar, privat…”
- Connor v. Monkem Co., Inc. (Supreme Court of Missouri 1995, 898 S.W.2d 89)“…eks to bring a wrongful death claim as a father pursuant to section 537.080, RSMo 1994 [1] , for the death of an unborn c…”
- State Ex Rel. Kansas City Stock Yards Co. of Maine v. Clark (Supreme Court of Missouri 1976, 536 S.W.2d 142)“…eld sec. 1.010, as amended, applicable to a construction of sec. 537.080, RSMo 1969 (wrongful death statute) and held…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Medical Malpractice Laws in Missouri (2026): Deadlines & Caps, Missouri Wrongful Death Laws (2026): Deadlines
§ 537.100Limitation of action — effect of absence of defendant and nonsuit.In forcecited in 7 of our articles
1. Every action instituted under section 537.080 shall be commenced within three years after the cause of action shall accrue; provided, that if any defendant, whether a resident or nonresident of the state at the time any such cause of action accrues, shall then or thereafter be absent or depart from the state, so that personal service cannot be had upon such defendant in the state in any such action heretofore or hereafter accruing, the time during which such defendant is so absent from the state shall not be deemed or taken as any part of the time limited for the commencement of such action against him; and provided, that if any such action shall have been commenced within the time prescribed in this section, and the plaintiff therein take or suffer a nonsuit, or after a verdict for him the judgment be arrested, or after a judgment for him the same be reversed on appeal or error, such plaintiff may commence a new action from time to time within one year after such nonsuit suffered or such judgment arrested or reversed; and in determining whether such new action has been begun within the period so limited, the time during which such nonresident or absent defendant is so absent…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at revisor.mo.gov
Cited in 81 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):State Ex Rel. Kansas City Stock Yards Co. of Maine v. Clark (1976) applied section 537.100 to a wrongful death suit and held a workers' compensation claim did not toll the period or trigger its savings clause. Gaines v. Monsanto Co. (1983) applied the amended three-year period to a claim not yet barred when the amendment took effect.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Wanda Mayes v. Saint Luke's Hospital of Kansas City, (Consolidated with)Wanda Mayes v. Saint Luke's Hospital of Kansas City (Supreme Court of Missouri 2014)✓After two earlier suits were dismissed, the family refiled wrongful death claims in October 2012 over a patient who died in March 2008; the court applied section 537.100's three year limit, held the claims time barred, and affirmed the dismissal.
- Gaines v. Monsanto Co. (Missouri Court of Appeals 1983, 655 S.W.2d 568)✓Parents of a secretary murdered by a coworker sued Monsanto in March 1982, nearly three years after her April 1979 death; the court applied the amended three year period of section 537.100 because the claim was not barred when the amendment took effect, so the suit was timely.
- State Ex Rel. Kansas City Stock Yards Co. of Maine v. Clark (Supreme Court of Missouri 1976, 536 S.W.2d 142)✓A worker's widow and children sued more than a year after his 1970 death, arguing an unsuccessful Kansas workers' compensation claim tolled the deadline; the court held section 537.100's nonsuit savings clause did not reach that claim and made prohibition absolute.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Missouri Slip and Fall Laws: Proving Premises Liability in the Show-Me State, Missouri Statute of Limitations: Filing Deadlines by Case Type, Truck Accident Laws in Missouri (2026): Deadlines & Liability
Revised Statutes of Missouri, Title XXXV (CIVIL PROCEDURE AND LIMITATIONS), Chapter 516
§ 516.120What actions within five years.In forcecited in 9 of our articles
Within five years: (1) All actions upon contracts, obligations or liabilities, express or implied, except those mentioned in section 516.110, and except upon judgments or decrees of a court of record, and except where a different time is herein limited; (2) An action upon a liability created by a statute other than a penalty or forfeiture; (3) An action for trespass on real estate; (4) An action for taking, detaining or injuring any goods or chattels, including actions for the recovery of specific personal property, or for any other injury to the person or rights of another, not arising on contract and not herein otherwise enumerated; (5) An action for relief on the ground of fraud, the cause of action in such case to be deemed not to have accrued until the discovery by the aggrieved party, at any time within ten years, of the facts constituting the fraud.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-08 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at revisor.mo.gov
Cited in 500 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Davis v. Laclede Gas Co. (Supreme Court of Missouri 1980, 603 S.W.2d 554)“…Count II are barred by the five-year statute of limitation. § 516.120, RSMo 1969. An appeal was taken to the East…”
- H.R.B. v. J.L.G. (Missouri Court of Appeals 1995, 913 S.W.2d 92)“…iff attempts to avoid the five year statute of limitations [RSMo § 516.120(4)] 2 by arguing that his psychologica…”
- Martin v. Crowley, Wade & Milstead, Inc. (Supreme Court of Missouri 1985, 702 S.W.2d 57)“…ed that an action such as the subject case is controlled by § 516.120, RSMo. 1978 which imposes a five year limit o…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Missouri Dog Bite Laws: Liability and Victim Rights, Missouri Audio Recording Laws: One-Party Consent Rules and Penalties, Missouri Car Accident Laws: Fault, Insurance, and Your Claim
§ 516.105Actions against health care and mental health providers (medical malpractice).In forcecited in 4 of our articles
1. All actions against physicians, hospitals, dentists, registered or licensed practical nurses, optometrists, podiatrists, pharmacists, chiropractors, professional physical therapists, mental health professionals licensed under chapter 337, and any other entity providing health care services and all employees of any of the foregoing acting in the course and scope of their employment, for damages for malpractice, negligence, error or mistake related to health care shall be brought within two years from the date of occurrence of the act of neglect complained of, except that: (1) In cases in which the act of neglect complained of is introducing and negligently permitting any foreign object to remain within the body of a living person, the action shall be brought within two years from the date of the discovery of such alleged negligence, or from the date on which the patient in the exercise of ordinary care should have discovered such alleged negligence, whichever date first occurs; and (2) In cases in which the act of neglect complained of is the negligent failure to inform the patient of the results of medical tests, the action for failure to inform shall be brought within two…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at revisor.mo.gov
Cited in 106 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Strahler v. St. Luke's Hospital (Supreme Court of Missouri 1986, 706 S.W.2d 7)“…y of Missouri's medical malpractice statute of limitations, § 516.105, RSMo 1978, as it applies to minors. We order…”
- State Ex Rel. Linthicum v. Calvin (Supreme Court of Missouri 2001, 57 S.W.3d 855)“…less commenced within the time prescribed...."). See also sec. 516.105, RSMo 2000 (all actions for medical malpracti…”
- Rowland v. Skaggs Companies, Inc. (Supreme Court of Missouri 1984, 666 S.W.2d 770)“…cable to actions for damages against health care providers, § 516.105, RSMo 1978 [1] , barred Skaggs' suit for cont…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Missouri Medical Recording Laws: Patient Rights, HIPAA, and Consent (2026)
Revised Statutes of Missouri, Title XIX (MOTOR VEHICLES, WATERCRAFT AND AVIATION), Chapter 302
§ 302.020Operation of motor vehicle without proper license prohibited, penalty — motorcycles — special license — protective headgear, failure to wear, fine, amount — no points to be assessed.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
1. Unless otherwise provided for by law, it shall be unlawful for any person, except those expressly exempted by section 302.080, to: (1) Operate any vehicle upon any highway in this state unless the person has a valid license; (2) Operate a motorcycle or motortricycle upon any highway of this state unless such person has a valid license that shows the person has successfully passed an examination for the operation of a motorcycle or motortricycle as prescribed by the director. The director may indicate such upon a valid license issued to such person, or shall issue a license restricting the applicant to the operation of a motorcycle or motortricycle if the actual demonstration, required by section 302.173, is conducted on such vehicle; (3) Authorize or knowingly permit a motorcycle or motortricycle owned by such person or under such person's control to be driven upon any highway by any person whose license does not indicate that the person has passed the examination for the operation of a motorcycle or motortricycle or has been issued an instruction permit therefor; (4) Operate a motor vehicle with an instruction permit or license issued to another person.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at revisor.mo.gov
Cited in 17 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2014
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- State v. Joos (Missouri Court of Appeals 2003, 120 S.W.3d 778)“…out a valid license, a Class A misdemeanor, in violation of § 302.020, RSMo.2000. He was sentenced to 15 hours of c…”
- City of St. Louis v. Carpenter (Supreme Court of Missouri 1961, 341 S.W.2d 786)“…be licensed either as an operator or a chauffeur. See also § 302.020, RSMo 1949, as amended, V.A.M.S. If th…”
- State v. Miller (Missouri Court of Appeals 2005, 172 S.W.3d 838)“…fficer probable cause to arrest a driver for a violation of Section 302.020, RSMo (1969). Id. at 869 . That section…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Missouri E-Scooter Laws: Sidewalk, Helmet & Age Rules (2026)
§ 302.026Motorcycle operators twenty-six years of age or older, no protective headgear required, when — proof of insurance coverage required.In force
1. Any qualified motorcycle operator who is twenty-six years of age or older may operate a motorcycle or motortricycle upon any highway of this state without wearing protective headgear if he or she in addition to maintaining proof of financial responsibility in accordance with chapter 303, is covered by a health insurance policy or other form of insurance which will provide the person with medical benefits for injuries incurred as a result of an accident while operating or riding on a motorcycle or motortricycle. 2. Proof of coverage required by subsection 1 of this section shall be provided, upon request by authorized law enforcement, by showing a copy of the qualified operator's insurance card. 3. No person shall be stopped, inspected, or detained solely to determine compliance with this section.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at revisor.mo.gov
Revised Statutes of Missouri, Title XIX (MOTOR VEHICLES, WATERCRAFT AND AVIATION), Chapter 307
§ 307.178Seat belts required for passenger cars — passenger cars defined — exceptions — failure to comply, effect on evidence and damages, admissible as evidence, when — penalty — passengers in car exceeding number of seat belts not violation for failure to use.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
1. As used in this section, the term "passenger car" means every motor vehicle designed for carrying ten persons or less and used for the transportation of persons; except that, the term "passenger car" shall not include motorcycles, motorized bicycles, motor tricycles, and trucks with a licensed gross weight of twelve thousand pounds or more. 2. Each driver, except persons employed by the United States Postal Service while performing duties for that federal agency which require the operator to service postal boxes from their vehicles, or which require frequent entry into and exit from their vehicles, and front seat passenger of a passenger car manufactured after January 1, 1968, operated on a street or highway in this state, and persons less than eighteen years of age operating or riding in a truck, as defined in section 301.010, on a street or highway of this state shall wear a properly adjusted and fastened safety belt that meets federal National Highway, Transportation and Safety Act requirements. No person shall be stopped, inspected, or detained solely to determine compliance with this subsection. The provisions of this section and section 307.179 shall not be…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-31 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at revisor.mo.gov
Cited in 7 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2021
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Opinion No. (1998) (Missouri Attorney General Reports 1998)“…possible conflict between subsection 1 and subsection 2 of Section 307.178 , RSMo Supp. 1997. Section 307.178 provides:…”
- Opinion No. (1992) (Missouri Attorney General Reports 1992)“…ion or warning) to ensure compliance with the provisions of Section 307.178 , RSMo, be taken by police officers, based sol…”
- State v. Smith (Missouri Court of Appeals 2004, 134 S.W.3d 35)“…fading to secure a child in a safety belt, in violation of Section 307.178 RSMo (2000). Defendant filed a motion and a…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Missouri Car Seat Laws (2026): Ages, Booster & Penalty
Sources and References
- RSMo 516.120 - Actions within five years; injury to the person or rights of another (personal-injury statute of limitations)(revisor.mo.gov).gov
- RSMo 537.100 - Wrongful death action; three-year limitation from date of death(revisor.mo.gov).gov
- RSMo 302.020 - Operation of motorcycles; protective headgear required for riders under 26 and instruction-permit holders(revisor.mo.gov).gov
- RSMo 302.026 - Riders 26 and older exempt from helmet if carrying proof of financial responsibility and health insurance(revisor.mo.gov).gov
- RSMo 307.178 - Seat belts; effect on evidence and damages; passenger car defined to exclude motorcycles(revisor.mo.gov).gov
- Gustafson v. Benda, 661 S.W.2d 11 (Mo. 1983) - Missouri Supreme Court adopts pure comparative fault(courtlistener.com)
- Missouri Department of Revenue - Auto insurance requirements (25/50/25 minimum liability plus uninsured-motorist coverage)(dor.mo.gov).gov
- U.S. NHTSA - Motorcycle safety and helmet effectiveness(nhtsa.gov).gov
Paid attorney referral. RecordingLaw may receive compensation when you use an attorney-help link. RecordingLaw is not a law firm. Submitting a request does not guarantee that an attorney will accept your case and does not create an attorney-client relationship.