Published: July 21, 2026
By: Yaghmai Law Firm, APC
(Seal Beach, CA) – A 72-year-old Seal Beach woman who was badly hurt in March when she was hit by a teenager on an e-motorcycle has begun speaking publicly about her long recovery and her push for tougher e-bike safety awareness.
The woman recalls little of the collision beyond stepping into a crosswalk near Ocean Avenue at about 5:30 p.m. after visiting friends on Main Street, according to a report from KABC. She said she regained awareness in the intensive care unit with serious injuries, including fractures to a leg, a hand, her nose and her jaw.
She later understood that the vehicle involved was a Surron-style e-motorcycle ridden by a juvenile, who was not hurt, according to the Seal Beach Police Department. Her treatment included two weeks in intensive care followed by roughly four weeks at a rehabilitation facility before she was cleared to return home once she could speak and swallow on her own.
Four months on, she remains in recovery and is scheduled for jaw surgery the following month, the report said. She has been sharing her account to encourage families to understand the rules that apply when children ride these machines. She is set to speak on July 28 at an e-bike safety luncheon organized by the Seal Beach Rotary Club, an event that representatives from the Orange County District Attorney's Office are also expected to attend. KABC reported that a separate case unfolded during her recovery, in which an 81-year-old man was struck by a teen on an e-motorcycle in Lake Forest and later died of his injuries.
Know Your Rights After a Crash
After a serious crash, California law gives injured people and families limited time to act. Evidence like vehicle data, camera footage, and witness memories fades quickly. A free, no-obligation case review can help you understand your options. Call or text (888) 800-6731, or start a free case review online. Asistencia en español disponible.
Analysis of the Seal Beach E-Motorcycle Collision
This remains an account drawn from public reporting, and nothing here should be read as a finding about how the crash happened or who bore responsibility. In California, a crash involving a pedestrian in a crosswalk typically prompts investigators to examine the movements and duties of everyone involved. Under Vehicle Code section 21950, drivers must yield to pedestrians in a marked or unmarked crosswalk, while pedestrians carry their own duty of care. How those duties applied, if at all, would depend entirely on facts developed through investigation.
Where a rider's conduct is at issue, the Basic Speed Law under Vehicle Code section 22350 may become relevant if evidence shows a vehicle was moving faster than was reasonable for the conditions. Separately, Evidence Code section 669 allows a presumption of negligence when someone violates a statute designed to prevent the type of harm that occurred and the injured person falls within the class the statute protects. Whether any such presumption could apply here would turn on evidence that has not been publicly established.
Because the rider was described as a juvenile, questions of civil responsibility can extend beyond the operator. California's general negligence principle under Civil Code section 1714 holds people accountable for harm caused by a lack of ordinary care, and courts frequently examine the role of parents or guardians who permit a minor to operate such a vehicle. If liability were established, the measure of recoverable damages under Civil Code section 3333 covers the detriment proximately caused, and Civil Code section 1431.2 governs how non-economic damages are apportioned according to each party's share of fault.
What Injured Pedestrians and Families Can Do
Anyone seriously hurt as a pedestrian should prioritize medical care and follow-up, request a copy of the police collision report, and preserve evidence such as photographs, the vehicle description, and witness contacts while memories are fresh. California generally allows two years to bring a personal injury claim under Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1, though deadlines can shift in cases involving minors or public entities, so timing matters. Because claims tied to e-motorcycles and juvenile riders can raise complex questions of coverage and responsibility, it is often worth speaking with a qualified attorney early. Were you, or someone you love, involved in this crash? A California motorcycle accident lawyer at Yaghmai Law Firm can explain your options and deal with the insurance companies for you. Call or text (888) 800-6731 or request a free case review.
About the Author
Houtan Yaghmai, Esq., President & Managing Attorney of Yaghmai Law Firm, APC. California State Bar No. 298487. Speaks English, French, and Persian. The firm represents personal injury clients throughout Southern California – consultations by phone, text, or video, no office visits required.
This post was assembled with AI assistance from publicly reported news sources cited below. All California Vehicle Code references were verified against leginfo.legislature.ca.gov. Facts were re-checked via additional web searches before publication. This post is based on initial news reports and may be updated as new facts develop. Nothing in this article is legal advice. Yaghmai Law Firm, APC is not associated with the investigating agencies and does not represent any party named in this post unless explicitly stated.
Sources:
1. X_CA_LOCAL_NEWS – ABC7 Eyewitness News: A 72-year-old woman who was seriously hurt after being struck by a teen on an e-motorcycle is speaking out, sharing details of her monthslong recovery and urging greater safety and accountability. @abc7bianca Read more: abc7ne.ws/qKHwkY: https://abc7ne.ws/qKHwkY
