The wrongful death case known as the Molly Steinsapir e-bike lawsuit ended quietly on April 13, 2023, when Molly’s parents dismissed their claims against Rad Power Bikes and the helmet defendants with prejudice, a resolution consistent with a confidential settlement reached before the scheduled October 2023 trial.1UniCourt. Steinsapir et al. vs. Rad Power Bikes Inc. et al. Terms were not publicly disclosed. The case drew national attention to the risks children face on electric bikes and the duties manufacturers owe when minors end up riding adult-rated products.
What Happened to Molly Steinsapir
On January 31, 2021, 12-year-old Molly Steinsapir was riding on the back of a Rad Power Bikes RadRunner e-bike down Enchanted Way, a steep residential street in Pacific Palisades. Her 11-year-old friend, Eme Green, was operating the bike.2Los Angeles Times. E-Bike Crash Death: Daughter, Manufacturer to Blame, Rad Power Bikes
According to the lawsuit later filed by Molly’s parents, when the friend tried to brake during the descent, the bike began to shake and wobble and failed to stop. Both girls were thrown onto the concrete. Molly was found face-down and unresponsive, still wearing her helmet, with severe head injuries. She underwent multiple brain surgeries but never regained consciousness and died on February 15, 2021, about two weeks after the crash.3Bicycling. Molly Steinsapir Lawsuit: Rad Power Electric Bike
The Lawsuit and What the Parents Alleged
On August 1, 2022, Jonathan and Kaye Steinsapir filed a wrongful death lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court. The complaint alleged product negligence, breach of warranty, strict product liability, and wrongful death against Rad Power Bikes, and named Giro Sport Design, Bell Sports, and Vista Outdoor as defendants over claims that Molly’s Giro Vasona helmet was defective.4New York Times. Team Molly: Rad Power Bikes Lawsuit5Bicycle Retailer. Rad Power Bikes, Giro Face Wrongful Death Suit
Design Defect Claims
The Steinsapirs alleged the RadRunner had design defects that made it dangerous on hills. The complaint identified the combination of disc brakes and a quick-release front-wheel axle as a known safety hazard that could cause the wheel to wobble or detach, and said the bike’s low “trail” measurement made it inherently unstable.3Bicycling. Molly Steinsapir Lawsuit: Rad Power Electric Bike
Marketing to Children
The second major allegation targeted how the bike was sold. The complaint said the RadRunner’s manual stated it was intended for riders 18 and older, but that warning appeared on page 49 of a 57-page document. The parents alleged Rad Power Bikes knew minors made up a significant share of its customer base and did nothing meaningful to address the safety risks that followed.2Los Angeles Times. E-Bike Crash Death: Daughter, Manufacturer to Blame, Rad Power Bikes
Helmet Claims
The complaint also alleged that the Giro Vasona helmet cracked on impact but failed to cushion the blow or transfer force away from Molly’s brain, did not comply with federal safety standards under 16 C.F.R. § 1203, and lacked adequate warnings about its limitations.6Schmidt Law. Steinsapir v. Rad Power Bikes Complaint for Damages
How Rad Power Bikes Responded
Rad Power Bikes denied responsibility. The company said its position had “always been that its ebikes should not be operated by anyone under the age of 16” and that age warnings had “always appeared” in its manuals. After the suit was filed, Rad Power updated the RadRunner manual to place the age restriction on the first interior page. A company spokesperson offered condolences to the Steinsapir family but declined further comment on the pending case.3Bicycling. Molly Steinsapir Lawsuit: Rad Power Electric Bike
The $1.5 Million Settlement With the Other Family
Before suing Rad Power, the Steinsapirs reached a separate $1.5 million settlement in March 2022 with Lyle and Melanie Green, the parents of the friend who was operating the e-bike. Rad Power Bikes opposed that settlement and filed a cross-complaint seeking indemnification from the Greens, arguing they had ignored manual warnings about children riding the bike. The company characterized any wrongdoing on its part as “passive” compared with the “active and primary” liabilities of the parents who allowed an 11-year-old to ride the e-bike.7Bicycle Retailer. Good Faith Settlement Reached Among Parents Involved in Rad Power Case
Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Richard L. Fruin rejected the challenge and approved the good-faith settlement on December 10, 2022, dismissing Rad Power’s cross-complaint. Bell Sports, which also denied liability, approved the settlement and agreed to be held harmless for economic damages above any percentage of fault assigned to it.7Bicycle Retailer. Good Faith Settlement Reached Among Parents Involved in Rad Power Case
How the Case Against Rad Power Bikes Ended
Trial was set for October 16, 2023, but the case never reached a jury. On April 13, 2023, the Steinsapirs filed a request for dismissal of the entire action with prejudice, and the court vacated the trial date. A dismissal with prejudice means the claims cannot be refiled, which typically signals a confidential settlement. The Steinsapirs had previously cited nearly $800,000 in medical costs and had offered Rad Power the chance to settle within the company’s $7 million insurance policy limit.1UniCourt. Steinsapir et al. vs. Rad Power Bikes Inc. et al.7Bicycle Retailer. Good Faith Settlement Reached Among Parents Involved in Rad Power Case Neither side has publicly confirmed any settlement amount with Rad Power Bikes or the helmet defendants.
What Happened to Rad Power Bikes After the Case
Rad Power’s legal problems continued after the Steinsapir case closed. A 2023 class action in the Western District of Washington repeated the Steinsapirs’ disc-brake and quick-release axle allegations, and the company has faced additional suits over battery fires and sudden stops.8ClassAction.org. Rad E-Bikes Are Defectively Designed, Class Action Lawsuit Claims
On November 24, 2025, the Consumer Product Safety Commission issued a public safety warning urging consumers to immediately stop using certain lithium-ion batteries sold with Rad Power e-bikes, citing fire, injury, and death hazards. The agency reported 31 fire incidents and roughly $734,500 in property damage, with some fires occurring while batteries were in storage. The affected models (RP-1304, RAD-S1304Y, and HL-RP-S1304) were used in the RadRunner, RadWagon 4, and RadRover.9U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. CPSC Warns Consumers to Immediately Stop Using Batteries for E-Bikes from Rad Power Bikes Rad Power refused to agree to a formal recall, telling the CPSC that a full battery replacement program “would immediately put Rad out of business,” and offered consumers a discounted upgrade to its newer “Safe Shield” batteries instead.10Bicycle Retailer. CPSC Warns About Fire Hazard in Rad Power Lithium-Ion Batteries
Three weeks later, on December 15, 2025, Rad Power Bikes filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Washington, reporting roughly $32.1 million in assets against $72.8 million in liabilities. Reports indicated losses of about $40 million annually on $63.3 million in sales. The company stated it intended to keep operating while pursuing a sale within 45 to 60 days, though observers suggested the case could end in Chapter 7 liquidation.11Bicycle Retailer. Rad Power Bikes Files for Bankruptcy Protection The bankruptcy complicates the practical outlook for current and future plaintiffs seeking recovery from the company.
California E-Bike Age Rules After the Case
The Steinsapir crash exposed a gap in California law that has only been partially closed. Under California’s e-bike classification system, Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes, which include the RadRunner, carry no minimum age requirement for riders. Only Class 3 e-bikes, which offer pedal assistance up to 28 mph, require riders to be at least 16. All riders under 18 must wear helmets on any bicycle, and all Class 3 riders must wear helmets regardless of age.12CalBike. California E-Bike Classifications
Local pilot programs have begun to fill the gap. San Diego County jurisdictions can prohibit riders under 12 from operating Class 1 and Class 2 e-bikes, and Marin County prohibits riders under 16 from operating Class 2 e-bikes. In 2026, the California legislature is considering at least nine e-bike bills. AB 2346 would impose a statewide 15 mph speed limit for riders aged 15 and younger and require manufacturers to clearly disclose age restrictions and safety information to buyers. AB 1557 would reclassify many bikes currently rated Class 1 or 2 as Class 3, bringing them under the existing age-16 minimum. SB 956 would let local governments statewide set their own age, speed, and equipment rules.13California Legislature. AB 2595 Analysis14California Medical Association. Assemblymember Lori Wilson Introduces CMA-Sponsored Bill to Modernize E-Bike Safety Laws and Protect Kids