New York
Motorcycle Accident Laws in New York (2026): Deadlines
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 18, 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 New York is governed by a mix of rules that work very differently for riders than for drivers of cars. One of them is easy to get wrong: New York is a no-fault state for cars, but motorcycles are excluded from the no-fault system, which actually frees an injured rider to sue the at-fault driver without clearing the usual injury threshold. This guide walks through the New York rules that shape a motorcycle-injury or wrongful-death claim, starting with the filing deadline and the fault rule, then the helmet, no-fault, and lane rules that are specific to riders. It is general information, not legal advice.
This page is part of our Motorcycle Accident Laws by State series. Deadlines are firm and every crash is different, so treat the figures below as a starting point and confirm the current law before relying on it.
The New York deadline to sue (statute of limitations)
The first thing to protect after a motorcycle crash in New York is the deadline. A negligence-based personal-injury lawsuit must generally be filed within three years of the crash under CPLR 214, which sets a three-year limit for actions to recover damages for a personal injury. A wrongful-death action is shorter: it must be brought within two years of the date of death under EPTL 5-4.1.
Those two deadlines run from different dates and can expire at different times, which is a common trap when an injury later proves fatal. There are also narrow tolling rules, for example for injured minors and certain claims against public entities, which can carry much shorter notice deadlines. Because these rules are unforgiving, the safe assumption is that a clock is already running.
How New York splits fault: pure comparative negligence
The general rule is set by CPLR 1411(a): a jury assigns each party a percentage of fault, and the injured person's recovery is reduced by their own percentage, with no cutoff that bars recovery. A claimant found 60 percent at fault still recovers 40 percent of the damages. That is more favorable to injured people than the modified systems used in most states, where being more than half at fault ends the case.
One important qualification arrived in 2026. An amendment enacted in that year's budget legislation (S9008-C, signed May 26, 2026 as chapter 58 of the Laws of 2026) added a new CPLR 1411(b), which provides that in an action for personal injury subject to Article 51 of the Insurance Law, fault attributable to the claimant bars recovery if it is greater than the fault of the person or persons sued. In other words, motor-vehicle claims that fall under Article 51, New York's no-fault article, now run on a modified 51 percent rule rather than a pure one.
Whether that reaches a motorcyclist is the open question, and the answer probably turns on the same exclusion that keeps riders out of no-fault. Insurance Law 5102(f) defines motor vehicle for Article 51 purposes and expressly says it shall not include a motorcycle, and 5102(j) defines a covered person by reference to that definition. On that reading a rider's action is not subject to Article 51, so CPLR 1411(a) and its pure comparative rule still govern. The provision is new, though, and no court has yet applied it to a motorcycle case, so a rider who bears a large share of fault should treat the point as unsettled and have it looked at rather than assume the old rule. If that describes your crash, ask a New York motorcycle accident lawyer for a free claim review on whether the new 51 percent bar reaches your claim (attorney advertising).
Either way, fault is not irrelevant. Insurers in motorcycle cases often try to push a large share onto the rider, sometimes leaning on stereotypes about speed or risk-taking, because every percentage point of fault still reduces the recovery. Solid evidence that the other driver caused the crash, covered below, protects the value of the claim.
No-fault, PIP, and why motorcycles are different
New York is a no-fault state for cars. Car drivers normally turn to their own no-fault (PIP) benefits first for medical bills and lost earnings, and can only step outside the system to sue for pain and suffering after meeting the statutory serious-injury threshold. Motorcycles are the major exception. Under Insurance Law 5102 and 5103, the no-fault definitions exclude occupants of a motorcycle, so a rider is not covered by no-fault benefits and is not subject to the no-fault rules.
That exclusion cuts two ways. A motorcyclist usually has no no-fault benefits to fall back on for early medical bills, so the rider's own medical-payments and uninsured/underinsured-motorist coverage matter a great deal. But because the rider is outside the no-fault system, the serious-injury threshold does not gate the claim the way it does for a car occupant: an injured motorcyclist can pursue the at-fault driver directly for the full range of damages, including pain and suffering, from the start. Pedestrians struck by a motorcycle are still covered by no-fault, but the rider is not.
New York's helmet law
New York has a universal helmet law. Under VTL 381, it is unlawful for any person to operate or ride upon a motorcycle without a protective helmet that meets federal motor-vehicle safety standards. The helmet requirement applies to every operator and passenger regardless of age, and there is no optional-helmet exemption. VTL 381(7) adds a separate eye-protection rule, but it is narrower: it requires goggles or an approved face shield of a person who operates a motorcycle, not of a passenger.
Can the helmet question reduce your damages?
Because New York requires every rider to wear a helmet, the optional-helmet "helmet defense" seen in other states rarely arises for a properly helmeted rider. For seat belts, New York treats nonuse as a damages question rather than a liability question. Under the New York Court of Appeals decision in Spier v. Barker, failure to use an available seat belt can be considered by a jury only in reducing damages for injuries the seat belt would have prevented, and only when the defendant proves the causal connection. It cannot be used to decide liability for the crash. Spier itself addressed only seat belts in a passenger car and did not decide how helmet nonuse is treated.
Lane splitting in New York
Lane splitting is expressly prohibited in New York. Under VTL 1252, a motorcycle may not be operated between lanes of traffic or between adjacent rows of vehicles, and a rider may not pass another vehicle in the same lane. Two motorcycles may share a single lane, but riding between lanes is illegal. A rider who lane splits can be ticketed and exposed to a larger share of fault if a crash results. California remains the only state that has expressly legalized lane splitting.
Damage caps and minimum insurance
New York does not cap compensatory damages in an ordinary motorcycle-injury or wrongful-death case, so medical bills, lost earnings, and pain and suffering are generally not subject to a statutory ceiling. There is now one narrow exception to know about. The same 2026 budget legislation that amended CPLR 1411 added Insurance Law 5104(d), which limits recovery for non-economic loss to $100,000 in a serious-injury case brought by an at-fault claimant who was operating an uninsured motor vehicle, who was impaired and convicted for it, or who was committing a felony. That limit sits inside Article 51, and Insurance Law 5102(f) excludes motorcycles from the motor-vehicle definition Article 51 uses, so it should not reach an injured rider. As with the fault amendment, the language is new and untested, so an uninsured or impaired rider should not treat the point as settled. On insurance, New York requires minimum liability coverage of 25/50/10, meaning $25,000 per person and $50,000 per accident for bodily injury and $10,000 for property damage, with higher 50/100 limits when an accident causes death, plus mandatory uninsured-motorist coverage. Because the other driver may still be underinsured for a serious motorcycle injury, a rider's own uninsured/underinsured-motorist coverage is often the most important policy in the case.
Why motorcycle cases are different
Motorcycle crashes tend to produce more severe injuries than car crashes because a rider has no surrounding cabin, and the New York-specific rules above stack on top of that: no no-fault benefits for the rider, a universal helmet requirement, a comparative-fault rule that trims recovery by the rider's own share, and juries that can carry bias against riders. Each of those is a reason that careful documentation of how the crash actually happened, and of the full extent of the injuries, can change the outcome of a claim.
Evidence and how to evaluate a claim
The strongest evidence in a motorcycle case is often gathered in the first days. The police crash report, photographs of the scene, the vehicles, and the rider's gear, the helmet itself, witness contact information, and complete medical records all help establish both fault and the severity of the harm. Most personal-injury lawyers in New York work on a contingency fee, meaning the fee is a percentage of any recovery with usually no upfront cost, and most offer a free initial consultation. No lawyer can promise a specific result or dollar figure, because the outcome depends on liability, the available insurance, the comparative-fault split, and the harm actually proven. The practical points are clear: a strict clock is running, the evidence is perishable, and pinning down the facts early protects the case.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the deadline to sue after a motorcycle accident in New York?
New York generally gives you three years from the date of the crash to file a personal-injury lawsuit under CPLR 214, but only two years from the date of death for a wrongful-death claim under EPTL 5-4.1. Those clocks run from different dates, and claims against a public entity can carry far shorter notice deadlines, so you should confirm your specific deadline early, because once it passes the claim is usually barred.
Is failing to wear a helmet going to hurt my case in New York?
New York requires every motorcycle rider and passenger to wear an approved helmet under VTL 381, so the question usually does not arise for a properly helmeted rider. Under Spier v. Barker, New York treats nonuse of an available seat belt as a damages issue, not a liability issue, and the defendant must prove the nonuse increased the injuries; Spier did not address helmets.
Is lane splitting legal in New York?
No. Lane splitting is expressly prohibited under VTL 1252, which bars operating a motorcycle between lanes of traffic or between adjacent rows of vehicles. A rider who lane splits can be ticketed and may be assigned a larger share of fault if a crash results, which reduces recovery under the comparative-fault rule in CPLR 1411.
How much is a motorcycle accident case worth?
There is no set figure and no one can honestly promise an amount. Value depends on the severity of the injuries, the medical bills and lost income, the available insurance (including your own uninsured/underinsured-motorist coverage), and your share of fault under CPLR 1411. New York does not cap compensatory damages in ordinary crash cases, and the 2026 non-economic-loss limit added by Insurance Law 5104(d) applies to Article 51 motor-vehicle claims, which exclude motorcycles by definition. The actual recovery still turns on the proof in your specific case.
Updates
Corrected the description of Spier v. Barker to the seat-belt holding the Court of Appeals actually reached, and removed the claim that it limits how helmet nonuse affects a rider's damages.
Updated the fault and damages sections for New York's 2026 amendments adding CPLR 1411(b) and Insurance Law 5104(d), explained why a motorcyclist most likely remains outside both, and corrected the eye-protection rule to apply to operators rather than passengers.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; 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.
New York Insurance Law
§ 5103Entitlement to first party benefits; additional financial security requiredIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
Entitlement to first party benefits; additional financial security required. (a) Every owner's policy of liability insurance issued on a motor vehicle in satisfaction of the requirements of article six or eight of the vehicle and traffic law shall also provide for; every owner who maintains another form of financial security on a motor vehicle in satisfaction of the requirements of such articles shall be liable for; and every owner of a motor vehicle required to be subject to the provisions of this article by subdivision two of section three hundred twenty-one of the vehicle and traffic law shall be liable for; the payment of first party benefits to: (1) Persons, other than occupants of another motor vehicle or a motorcycle, for loss arising out of the use or operation in this state of such motor vehicle. In the case of occupants of a bus other than operators, owners, and employees of the owner or operator of the bus, the coverage for first party benefits shall be afforded under the policy or policies, if any, providing first party benefits to the injured person and members of his household for loss arising out of the use or operation of any motor vehicle of such household.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-14 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislation.nysenate.gov
Cited in 119 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Viviane Etienne Medical Care v. Country-Wide Ins. (New York Court of Appeals 2015, 25 N.Y.3d 498)“…f the use or operation in this state of [a] motor vehicle" (Insurance Law § 5103 [a] [1]; see 11 NYCRR 65-1.1). Sta…”
- Presbyterian Hospital v. Maryland Casualty Co. (New York Court of Appeals 1997, 90 N.Y.2d 274)“…erage and other defenses, or the statutory exclusions under Insurance Law § 5103 (b). In particular, Insurance Law § 510…”
- Argentina v. Emery World Wide Delivery Corp. (New York Court of Appeals 1999, 93 N.Y.2d 554)“…r operation * * * of such motor vehicle” (see, Insurance Law § 5103 [a] [1]). We *561 held t…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Truck Accident Laws in New York (2026): Deadlines & Liability
§ 5102DefinitionsIn forcecited in 3 of our articles
Definitions. In this chapter: (a) "Basic economic loss" means, up to fifty thousand dollars per person of the following combined items, subject to the limitations of section five thousand one hundred eight of this article: (1) All necessary expenses incurred for: (i) medical, hospital (including services rendered in compliance with article forty-one of the public health law, whether or not such services are rendered directly by a hospital), surgical, nursing, dental, ambulance, x-ray, prescription drug and prosthetic services; (ii) psychiatric, physical therapy (provided that treatment is rendered pursuant to a referral) and occupational therapy and rehabilitation (provided that treatment is rendered pursuant to a referral); (iii) any non-medical remedial care and treatment rendered in accordance with a religious method of healing recognized by the laws of this state; and (iv) any other professional health services; all without limitation as to time, provided that within one year after the date of the accident causing the injury it is ascertainable that further expenses may be incurred as a result of the injury.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislation.nysenate.gov
Cited in 5,916 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Toure v. Avis Rent a Car Systems, Inc. (New York Court of Appeals 2002, 98 N.Y.2d 345)“…intiffs Toure and Manzano have satisfied their burden under Insurance Law § 5102 (d), 1 but plaintiff Nitti…”
- Pommells v. Perez (New York Court of Appeals 2005, 4 N.Y.3d 566)“…n of that vehicle in New York State, irrespective of fault (Insurance Law § 5102 [a]; § 5103). Only in the event of “ser…”
- Grasso v. Angerami (New York Court of Appeals 1991, 79 N.Y.2d 813)“…tion to defendant’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to Insurance Law § 5102 (d), plaintiff tendered proof of "serio…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: New York Car Accident Laws: No-Fault, Serious Injury, and Your Claim
§ 5104Causes of action for personal injuryIn forcecited in 3 of our articles
Causes of action for personal injury. (a) Notwithstanding any other law, in any action by or on behalf of a covered person against another covered person for personal injuries arising out of negligence in the use or operation of a motor vehicle in this state, there shall be no right of recovery for non-economic loss, except in the case of a serious injury, or for basic economic loss. The owner, operator or occupant of a motorcycle which has in effect the financial security required by article six or eight of the vehicle and traffic law, or which is referred to in subdivision two of section three hundred twenty-one of such law, shall not be subject to an action by or on behalf of a covered person for recovery for non-economic loss, except in the case of a serious injury, or for basic economic loss. No liability for non-economic loss shall be fixed unless and until the trier of fact has determined the existence of a serious injury. In any action to recover non-economic loss pursuant to this article, the trier of fact shall not determine the question of whether an injury is a serious injury until the trier of fact has determined the party or parties at fault.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-14 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislation.nysenate.gov
Cited in 296 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Van Nostrand v. Froehlich (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 2007, 44 A.D.3d 54)“…ising out of the use and operation of motor vehicles (see Insurance Law § 5104) is any different from the division of…”
- Dietrick v. Kemper Insurance (New York Court of Appeals 1990, 76 N.Y.2d 248)“…s the victim has suffered a "serious injury”, in which case Insurance Law § 5104 (a) allows the victim to commence a dir…”
- Abbas v. Cole (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 2007, 44 A.D.3d 31)“…0, 237 [1982]; Star v Badillo, 225 AD2d 610 [1996]; Insurance Law § 5104). Indeed, serious injury is a requireme…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
New York Civil Practice Law and Rules
§ 1411Damages recoverable when contributory negligence or assumption of risk is establishedIn forcecited in 5 of our articles
Damages recoverable when contributory negligence or assumption of risk is established. (a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, in any action to recover damages for personal injury, injury to property, or wrongful death, the culpable conduct attributable to the claimant or to the decedent, including contributory negligence or assumption of risk, shall not bar recovery. The amount of damages otherwise recoverable shall be diminished in the proportion which the culpable conduct attributable to the claimant or decedent bears to the culpable conduct which caused the damages. (b) In any action to recover damages for personal injury subject to article fifty-one of the insurance law, the culpable conduct attributable to the claimant shall bar recovery if the culpable conduct attributable to the claimant is greater than the culpable conduct of the person against whom recovery is sought or is greater than the combined culpable conduct of the persons against whom recovery is sought.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislation.nysenate.gov
Also relied on in: New York Dog Bite Laws: Liability and Victim Rights, New York Slip and Fall Laws: Proving Premises Liability
§ 214Actions to be commenced within three years: for non-payment of money collected on execution; for penalty created by statute; to recover c...In forcecited in 9 of our articles
Actions to be commenced within three years: for non-payment of money collected on execution; for penalty created by statute; to recover chattel; for injury to property; for personal injury; for malpractice other than medical, dental or podiatric malpractice; to annul a marriage on the ground of fraud. The following actions must be commenced within three years: 1. an action against a sheriff, constable or other officer for the non-payment of money collected upon an execution; 2. an action to recover upon a liability, penalty or forfeiture created or imposed by statute except as provided in sections 213 and 215; 3. an action to recover a chattel or damages for the taking or detaining of a chattel; 4. an action to recover damages for an injury to property except as provided in section 214-c; 5. an action to recover damages for a personal injury except as provided in sections 214-b, 214-c, 214-i and 215; 6. an action to recover damages for malpractice, other than medical, dental or podiatric malpractice, regardless of whether the underlying theory is based in contract or tort; and 7.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislation.nysenate.gov
Also relied on in: Car Accident Laws by State (2026): Fault, No-Fault, and Your Claim, Medical Malpractice Laws in New York (2026): Deadlines, New York Statute of Limitations: Filing Deadlines by Case Type
New York Vehicle and Traffic Law
§ 381Motorcycle equipmentIn force
Motorcycle equipment. 1. (a) Every motorcycle, driven upon the public highways of this state, shall be provided with adequate brakes in good working order and sufficient to control such motorcycle at all times, when the same is in use, a suitable and adequate bell, horn or other device for signaling, one red to amber stop lamp and shall, whenever such motorcycle is being operated upon the public highways of the state, display one lighted lamp in front and one on the rear, or, when such motorcycle is operated with a passenger or other truck attached to the side or front two such lamps on the front and one on the rear; and in all cases the lamps on a motorcycle shall include a red light visible from the rear. The rays of such rear lamp shall shine upon the number plate carried on the rear of such motorcycle in such manner as to render the numerals thereon visible for at least fifty feet in the direction from which the motorcycle is proceeding. The light of the front lamp or lamps shall be visible at least two hundred feet in the direction in which the motorcycle is proceeding.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislation.nysenate.gov
Cited in 4 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2011
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- People v. Bloomfield (New York Justice Court 1985, 130 Misc. 2d 151)“…nt was issued a uniform traffic summons for having violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 381 (6), more commonly known as the motorcy…”
- Luck v. Tellier (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 1995, 222 A.D.2d 783)“…(which, though not proof of negligence on his part [see, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 381 (1) (b)], may nevertheless be considere…”
- People v. Hendryx (New York County Courts 1998, 178 Misc. 2d 200)“…ic Law § 1120 [a]) and failure to wear a motorcycle helmet (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 381 [6]). The aggravated unlicensed operati…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 1252Operating motorcycles on roadways laned for trafficIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
Operating motorcycles on roadways laned for traffic. (a) All motorcycles are entitled to full use of a lane and no motor vehicle or motorcycle shall be driven in such a manner as to deprive any motorcycle of the full use of a lane. However, this subsection shall not be construed to prevent motorcycles from being operated two abreast in a single lane. (b) The operator of a motorcycle shall not overtake and pass in the same lane occupied by the vehicle being overtaken. (c) No person shall operate a motorcycle between lanes of traffic or between adjacent lines or rows of vehicles. (d) Motorcycles shall not be operated more than two abreast in a single lane. (e) Subsections (b) and (c) shall not apply to police officers in the performance of their official duties.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislation.nysenate.gov
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Collet v. Ortiz (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 2025, 2025 NY Slip Op 05789)“…ligence was the sole proximate cause of the accident ( see Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1252[b]; Rosenberg v Kotsek , 41 AD3d at…”
- People v. Kachalsky (Alan) (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York 2021, 73 Misc. 3d 138(A))“…fendant was charged with riding a motorcycle between lanes (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1252 [c]). It provides that, on December 18,…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Is Lane Splitting Legal in New York? (2026 Law)
New York Estates, Powers and Trusts Law
§ 5-4.1Action by personal representative for wrongful act, neglect orIn forcecited in 6 of our articles
Action by personal representative for wrongful act, neglect or default causing death of decedent 1. The personal representative, duly appointed in this state or any other jurisdiction, of a decedent who is survived by distributees may maintain an action to recover damages for a wrongful act, neglect or default which caused the decedent's death against a person who would have been liable to the decedent by reason of such wrongful conduct if death had not ensued. Such an action must be commenced within two years after the decedent's death; provided, however, that an action on behalf of a decedent whose death was caused by the terrorist attacks on September eleventh, two thousand one, other than a decedent identified by the attorney general of the United States as a participant or conspirator in such attacks, must be commenced within two years and six months after the decedent's death. When the distributees do not participate in the administration of the decedent's estate under a will appointing an executor who refuses to bring such action, the distributees are entitled to have an administrator appointed to prosecute the action for their benefit. 2.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-06 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legislation.nysenate.gov
Also relied on in: New York Wrongful Death Laws (2026): Deadlines
Sources and References
- New York State Senate, CPLR 214 (three-year limitation for personal-injury actions)(nysenate.gov).gov
- New York State Senate, EPTL 5-4.1 (two-year limitation for wrongful-death actions)(nysenate.gov).gov
- New York State Senate, CPLR 1411 (pure comparative negligence; damages diminished in proportion to plaintiff's fault)(nysenate.gov).gov
- New York State Senate, Insurance Law 5103 (no-fault first-party benefits exclude occupants of a motorcycle; read with the Section 5102 definitions)(nysenate.gov).gov
- New York State Senate, VTL 381 (universal motorcycle helmet and eye-protection requirement)(nysenate.gov).gov
- New York State Senate, VTL 1252 (lane splitting prohibited; no riding between lanes or rows of vehicles)(nysenate.gov).gov
- CourtListener, Spier v. Barker, 35 N.Y.2d 444 (1974) (nonuse of a safety device goes to mitigation of damages, not liability)(courtlistener.com)
- New York DMV, Insurance Requirements (minimum 25/50/10 liability with 50/100 for death; uninsured-motorist coverage required)(dmv.ny.gov).gov
- New York State Senate, Insurance Law 5102(f), (j) (Article 51 definition of motor vehicle expressly excludes a motorcycle; covered person defined by reference to it)(nysenate.gov)
- New York State Senate, Insurance Law 5104(d) (2026 amendment limiting non-economic loss to $100,000 for certain at-fault, uninsured, impaired, or felony-involved motor-vehicle claimants)(nysenate.gov)
- New York State Senate, S9008-C (chapter 58 of the Laws of 2026, signed May 26, 2026), the 2026-27 budget article VII bill that added CPLR 1411(b) and Insurance Law 5104(d)(nysenate.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.