Not sure I understand what you thought was stupid. Should she have been held liable? I think the key wording is “knowingly” and I’m not sure exactly how you would prove that, other then to have the sender say they are driving.
Who cares how easy it would be to prove? The idea that someone other than the driver would be blamed for distracted driving is a proposterous proposal. This is as absurd as the Seinfeld episode where Kramer crashes his car because he was looking at a woman in a bra, and sues her for being distracting.
I can see holding a parent responsible for a child’s behaviour, but even that is ludicrous at times. Holding an employer liable for an employee’s actions can make sense at times. Holding a text sender liable because the receiver makes the very poor decision to read the text and/or respond while driving is absolute idiocy.
I don’t think the court is out in left field here as they sometimes can be. To me it would depend on the facts and the bar would have to be high to link the knowledge to the accident. If the person texting knew the person driving and continued to text with them, they are encouraging a behavior that has shown to be as dangerous if not more frequent than DUI. I think the issue is how much would this person be liable? 100%? 5%? I think that is the question and where the lunacy will likely take place. There are already examples of people being liable for creating a roadside distraction ” so it is not completely unreasonable to bring in texting. But don’t get me wrong here, the driver is ultimately responsible and bears the majority of the blame.
Although I personally feel that it is the drivers issue solely if we can hold a restaurant responsible becouse the served someone a couple glasses of wine and they got in an accident why not the sender of a text. Same logic applies, it is not the driver who is responsible but rather someone with deeper pockets.
Just a thought but as the technology exists to know if someone is moving at rapid speeds maybe we should ding the cell phone companies for not having the phone warn the user of the hazard each time the attempt to read or send a text while in a car. Would seem to me to be just as responsible as the restaurant owner above as both are providing what the consumer wants for a profit.
It is scary how unbelievably stupid our courts can be.
Not sure I understand what you thought was stupid. Should she have been held liable? I think the key wording is “knowingly” and I’m not sure exactly how you would prove that, other then to have the sender say they are driving.
Who cares how easy it would be to prove? The idea that someone other than the driver would be blamed for distracted driving is a proposterous proposal. This is as absurd as the Seinfeld episode where Kramer crashes his car because he was looking at a woman in a bra, and sues her for being distracting.
I can see holding a parent responsible for a child’s behaviour, but even that is ludicrous at times. Holding an employer liable for an employee’s actions can make sense at times. Holding a text sender liable because the receiver makes the very poor decision to read the text and/or respond while driving is absolute idiocy.
I don’t think the court is out in left field here as they sometimes can be. To me it would depend on the facts and the bar would have to be high to link the knowledge to the accident. If the person texting knew the person driving and continued to text with them, they are encouraging a behavior that has shown to be as dangerous if not more frequent than DUI. I think the issue is how much would this person be liable? 100%? 5%? I think that is the question and where the lunacy will likely take place. There are already examples of people being liable for creating a roadside distraction ” so it is not completely unreasonable to bring in texting. But don’t get me wrong here, the driver is ultimately responsible and bears the majority of the blame.
Although I personally feel that it is the drivers issue solely if we can hold a restaurant responsible becouse the served someone a couple glasses of wine and they got in an accident why not the sender of a text. Same logic applies, it is not the driver who is responsible but rather someone with deeper pockets.
Just a thought but as the technology exists to know if someone is moving at rapid speeds maybe we should ding the cell phone companies for not having the phone warn the user of the hazard each time the attempt to read or send a text while in a car. Would seem to me to be just as responsible as the restaurant owner above as both are providing what the consumer wants for a profit.