Final answer:
The at least partial defense against the negligence claim in this scenario would be contributory negligence of the pedestrian.Option A is the correct answer.
Step-by-step explanation:
The at least partial defense against the negligence claim in this scenario would be a) Contributory negligence of the pedestrian.Contributory negligence refers to the negligence of the injured party that contributes to their own injuries. In this case, if the pedestrian was also negligent and contributed to the accident by failing to exercise reasonable care, their claim for negligence against the bicyclist may be diminished or barred.
The other options listed (b) Lack of bicycle helmet use by the pedestrian, (c) Failure to yield by the pedestrian, and (d) Inadequate lighting in the crosswalk, may be relevant factors in assessing the overall circumstances of the accident, but they do not directly represent a defense against the negligence claim.
Contributory negligence of the pedestrian (option a) serves as a potential defense in this scenario. If the pedestrian's actions contributed to the accident due to a failure to exercise reasonable care, their claim against the bicyclist for negligence may be weakened or barred. While other factors like helmet use, failure to yield, and inadequate lighting are relevant, they don't directly constitute a defense against the negligence claim but may contribute to the overall assessment of the accident.