Wednesday, August 29, 2012

San Francisco Pedestrian Struck by Driver Talking on Cell Phone

Pedestrian gets $25K after struck by driver on cell phone

A pedestrian recovered $25,000 for injuries claimed after a turning vehicle struck her. In 2009, Jane Zhang Ma, then 41, was crossing the street when Xerxes Jimmy Dorabjee made a left turn near her. She claimed the right side of the car struck her. She did not fall, but suffered an elbow contusion, and spinal sprains and strains. Ma claimed that she had a green pedestrian light as she crossed the road, but that Dorabjee was on his cell phone and not paying attention. Dorabjee denied being on the phone and claimed Ma walked into his car while crossing outside of a marked crosswalk. The jury found Ma 25 percent at fault, reducing her $36,098 award. The award was then further reduced due to the case being filed in a limited jurisdiction court.
Ma v. Dorabjee
San Francisco County



For legal assistance for victims injured by distracted driver talking or texting on cell phones: Contact the California injury and accident law firm of Glotzer & Sweat, LLP statewide toll free #866-229-0101.

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

Singer Peter Frampton Injured by Texting Driver in Southern California


Singer-guitarist Peter Frampton was hurt in a car accident on a Southern California highway, and claims a driver sending text messages was at fault.
Frampton says he suffers some neck and back pain and plans on visiting the ER.
After the accident, Frampton took to Twitter and blamed the collision on another driver. The 62-year-old rocker says he was sitting in stationary traffic on the highway when a "texting woman driver" ran into the back of him. In his tweet, Frampton suggests he may have suffered whiplash, reports CBS.
California is one of many states that has specifically banned texting while driving. The ban covers not only writing text messages, which allegedly led to Peter Frampton's car accident, but reading text messages as well. Also, the law makes it illegal to engage in other activities on a smartphone like writing and reading email messages and web browsing.
While the penalties for driving while texting are not that severe in California -- typically a $20 to $50 fine, plus state and local penalties that can add up to more than $100 -- the driver could face more significant liability in a lawsuit, such as when the distracted driver causes an accident.
In Peter Frampton's case, he claims that the texting woman caused the accident. Generally, liability for a car accident is similar to any other negligence claim, meaning that the driver who was at fault in causing the accident would be responsible for damages. If it can be shown that the woman was in fact texting as she drove, it would seem likely that she was responsible for the accident.
If you have been involved in a situation similar to Peter Frampton's car accident, you may want to contact a car accident attorney to learn about your rights and liabilities. Distracted driving laws differ in every state, and you will want an experienced attorney familiar with these laws.

If you or someone you know has been injured or killed by a California driver texting or talking on their cell phone, call Glotzer & Sweat, LLP (attorneys fighting against distracted drivers in California).  Statewide toll free # 866-229-0101 (Offices in Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, San Fernando Valley, Santa Barbara, San Diego, West Covina, Ontario (CA), Long Beach and Orange County, CA).

Thursday, August 23, 2012

NJ Distracted Driver Suit Resolved

« Back to Article

2 hurt by NJ text-messaging driver settle lawsuit

Updated 1:39 p.m., Tuesday, August 21, 2012
Comments (1)
Larger | Smaller
Email This
Font
Page 1 of 1
MORRISTOWN, N.J. (AP) — A couple who each lost a leg when their motorcycle was struck by a teenager who was driving and texting have settled their lawsuit against him for $500,000, their lawyer says.
The settlement amount for David and Linda Kubert equals the maximum payment driver Kyle Best's insurance would cover, lawyer Stephen Weinstein told Parsippany's Daily Record newspaper (http://dailyre.co/NeVcnz).
David Kubert had his left leg torn off above the knee in the September 2009 wreck in Mine Hill. His wife later had her left leg amputated.
The couple, who lived in Dover, near where the accident took place, now live in Florida. They are struggling financially because he can't work and she hasn't returned to her job, their lawyer said Monday in announcing the settlement.
The couple still plan to appeal a judge's ruling that Best's girlfriend, who had sent him the text message to which he was replying, can't be held liable for the crash, the lawyer said.
Weinstein has argued, in what is believed to be the first case of its kind in the country, that text messages Shannon Colonna sent to Best played a role in the crash. He said Colonna should have known Best was driving and texting her at the time. He argued that while Colonna was not physically present at the wreck, she was "electronically present," and he asked for a jury to decide Colonna's liability in the case.
Colonna's lawyer, though, argued she had no control over when or how Best would read and respond to the message. And Colonna testified at a deposition she didn't know Best was driving at the time.
Best has pleaded guilty to distracted driving, admitting he was using his cellphone and acknowledging a series of text messages he exchanged with Colonna around the time of the accident. Records show Best responded to a text from Colonna seconds before dialing 911.
Best was ordered to speak to 14 high schools about the dangers of texting and driving and had to pay about $775 in fines, but his driver's license was not suspended.


Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/2-hurt-by-NJ-text-messaging-driver-settle-lawsuit-3804487.php#ixzz24P9Cn62g
 
 
If you or someone you know has been injured by a distracted driver texting or talking on their cell phone, call the Law Offices of Glotzer & Sweat, LLP (California accident and injury attorneys with offices in Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, Palmdale/Lancaster, West Covina, Ontario, San Diego and Chula Vista).  California Statewide Toll Free #: 866-229-0101.
 

Monday, August 20, 2012

Distracted Driving Laws Pass Congressional Muster


U.S. Senate panel OKs state incentives

Last updated: April 19, 2012 · Print this report · Comment
    kay hutchison author of distracted driving billA key U.S. Senate panel has signed off on “the Distracted Driving Prevention Act,” which would bring $94 million in incentives to states that ban dangerous activities such as texting and cell-phoning while behind the wheel.
    On June 9, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation approved the driver safety legislation (SB 1938) from Sens. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., and Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas. It now goes to the full Senate.
    The approval was no surprise since Rockefeller is chairman of the Senate committee and Hutchison is its senior member.
    Hutchison noted that the Senate bill would not endanger existing highway funding. A rival plan, SB 1536, would cut existing grants to states that don’t ban texting while driving.
    “I think it is most appropriate for the states to handle this issue and devise laws that best meet their particular needs,” Hutchison said of her plan. “Our legislation does not threaten states with lost highway funds if they elect not to enact a distracted driving law.”
    The plan would establish an incentive grant fund that would be shared with states that adopt laws in line with the U.S. Department of Transportation’s guidelines. Funding would come from other government auto safety programs.
    In order to get a share of the $94 million distracted-driving-law incentives, states would have to ban texting and use of handheld cell phones for those operating a motor vehicle.
    Enforcement must be primary, meaning police can pull over and cite motorists for these offenses alone. Some states have watered-down laws and legislation that require another offense such as speeding before a driver can be cited.
    Senators wondered if the incentives were necessary since more than half of the states already have adopted bans on texting and driving.
    “It’s not as if the states are ignoring this issue and need this financial push from Congress,” Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., said.

    Sunday, August 19, 2012

    Texting and Driving in California Causes Accidents


    1 YEAR OLD BANNED FROM USING A PHONE FOR LIFE AFTER CAR CRASH

    A year ago, Ani Voskanian’s changed, as the 21 year old Californian woman got involved in a car crash at the corner of California and Columbus that cost 80 year old Misak Ranjibar his life.  After a 3 month investigation Voskanian was charged with one count of felony gross vehicular manslaughter, as it was discovered that she was texting while driving 75 seconds before the accident. While she faced up to 20 years in jail, Court Judge Patrick Hegarty accepted her no contest plea and gave her community sentence that has a surprising specific condition.
    In addition to having her driving license revoked for three years, Voskanian has been ordered to serve three year probation and 300 hours of community service in which she will have to tour junior and high school educating students on the dangers of texting while driving. Moreover, she is now banned for life from using a cell phone while inside a vehicle.
    After the trial, Glendale Police Det. Ashraf Mankarios responded to critics who said Voskanian got off easy after recklessly causing a man’s death.
    “In this particular case, there is a tragic loss of a father of a family. On the other hand, another family could have lost their daughter,” said the man who was the lead investigator in the case. “Although she will suffer the consequence as the result of this, in the end, both families came together, hugged and appear to be healing.”
    California has recently approved a bill to more than double the fines for texting while driving. Fines for using handheld cell phones or texting while driving would increase to $50 for a first offense ($310 with court costs) and to $100 for additional offenses ($528 with court costs). Also, a point would be charged against the driver’s license on second and subsequent offenses. The bill is still waiting Gov. Jerry Brown’s approval.
    Source: LA Times, August 19, 2011
    Share and Enjoy:
    • Print
    •  
    • Digg
    •  
    • del.icio.us
    •  
    • Facebook
    •  
    • Google Bookmarks
    •  
    • email
    •  
    • Fark
    •  
    • LinkedIn
    •  
    • Live
    •  
    • MySpace
    •  
    • Reddit
    •  
    • StumbleUpon
    •  
    • Technorati
    •  
    • Twitter
    Related posts:
    1. Teen faces manslaughter charge for texting while driving
    2. Surgeon loses life because of texting while driving
    3. Brooklyn teen facing 4 years in jail for texting while driving
    4. California aiming to toughen up on texting while driving
    5. 18-year-old faces 5 years in prison for texting while driving

    Friday, August 17, 2012

    California Vehicle Code Prohibits Certain Uses of Cell Phones in Motor Vehicles

    California Vehicle Code Section 23123:

    Hand Held Wireless Telephone Prohibited Use

    Hand-Held Wireless Telephone: Prohibited Use

    23123.  (a) A person shall not drive a motor vehicle while using a wireless telephone unless that telephone is specifically designed and configured to allow hands-free listening and talking, and is used in that manner while driving.
    (b) A violation of this section is an infraction punishable by a base fine of twenty dollars ($20) for a first offense and fifty dollars ($50) for each subsequent offense.
    (c) This section does not apply to a person using a wireless telephone for emergency purposes, including, but not limited to, an emergency call to a law enforcement agency, health care provider, fire department, or other emergency services agency or entity.
    (d) This section does not apply to an emergency services professional using a wireless telephone while operating an authorized emergency vehicle, as defined in Section 165, in the course and scope of his or her duties.
    (e) This section does not apply to a person driving a schoolbus or transit vehicle that is subject to Section 23125.
    (f) This section does not apply to a person while driving a motor vehicle on private property.
    (g) This section shall become operative on July 1, 2011.

    If you or someone you know has been injured or killed in California by a distracted driver using a cell phone for talking or texting, call the
    Law Offices of Glotzer & Sweat, LLP (Toll Free Statewide Number: 866-229-10101)

    (Offices in Beverly Hills, Los Angeles, Palmdale/Lancaster and the Antelope Valley, Encino/Sherman Oaks and the San Fernando Valley, Glendale/Pasadena, West Covina, Ontario (Riverside/San Bernardino and Inland Empire), San Diego, Chula Vista and Orange County, California).  We represent injured victims of distracted cell phone drivers throughout California.

    http://www.victimslawyer.com

      

    California Laws Regarding Use of Cell Phones in Motor Vehicles

    Text Messaging Law Effective January 1 2009 Cellular Phone Laws Effective July 1 2008

    (New Motor Vehicle Laws for 2009 )

    Wireless Communications Device and Wireless Telephone Laws FAQs

    Video iconCellular Phone Laws VideoView Video with Open Captions | View Video

    The new Wireless Communications Device Law (effective January 1, 2009) makes it an infraction to write, send, or read text-based communication on an electronic wireless communications device, such as a cell phone, while driving a motor vehicle.  
    Two additional laws dealing with the use of wireless telephones while driving went into effect July 1, 2008. The first law prohibits all drivers from using a handheld wireless telephone while operating a motor vehicle, (California Vehicle Code [VC] §23123). Motorists 18 and over may use a “hands-free device. The second law effective July 1, 2008, prohibits drivers under the age of 18 from using a wireless telephone or hands-free device while operating a motor vehicle (VC §23124).
    Below is a list of Frequently Asked Questions concerning these laws.

    Q: When did the wireless communications device (no texting) law take effect?
    A: The law took effect January 1, 2009.

    Q: When did the handheld wireless telephone laws take effect?
    A: The laws took effect July 1, 2008.

    Q: What is the difference between these laws?
    A: The first law prohibits all drivers from using a handheld wireless telephone while operating a motor vehicle, (California Vehicle Code [VC] §23123). Motorists 18 and over may use a “hands-free device.” The second law prohibits all drivers from texting while operating a motor vehicle (VC §23123.5). The third law prohibits drivers under the age of 18 from using a wireless telephone or hands-free device while operating a motor vehicle (VC §23124).

    Q: What if I need to use my telephone during an emergency and I do not have a “hands-free” device?
    A: The law allows a driver to use a wireless telephone to make emergency calls to a law enforcement agency, a medical provider, the fire department, or other emergency services agency.

    Q: What is the fine if I’m convicted?
    A: The base fine for the FIRST offense is $20 and $50 for subsequent convictions. With penalty assessments, the fine can be more than triple the base fine amount.

    Q: Will I receive a point on my driver license if I’m convicted for a violation of the wireless telephone or wireless communication device law?
    A: No. The violation is a reportable offense; however, a violation point will not be assigned to your DMV record.

    Q: Will the conviction appear on my driving record?
    A: Yes, but the violation point will not be added.

    Q: Is there a grace period, or will motorists get a warning?
    A: No. The laws became effective July 1, 2008, and January 1, 2009. Whether a citation is issued is always at the discretion of the officer based upon his or her determination of the most appropriate action for the situation.

    Q: Are passengers affected by these laws?
    A: No. These laws only apply to the person driving a motor vehicle.

    Q: Do these laws apply to out-of-state drivers whose home states do not have such laws?
    A: Yes.

    Q: Can I be pulled over by a law enforcement officer for using my handheld wireless telephone?
    A: Yes. A law enforcement officer can pull you over just for this infraction.

    Q: Can I be pulled over by a law enforcement officer for using my wireless communication device?
    A: Yes. A law enforcement officer can pull you over just for this infraction.

    Q: What if my phone has a push-to-talk feature, can I use that?
    A: No. Originally the law provided an exception for those operating a commercial motor truck or truck tractor (excluding pickups), implements of husbandry, farm vehicle or tow truck, to use a two-way radio operated by a "push-to-talk" feature. However, that exemption expired effective July 1, 2011. A push-to-talk feature attached to a hands-free ear piece or other hands-free device is acceptable.

    Q: What other exceptions are there?
    A: Operators of an authorized emergency vehicle during the course of employment are exempt, as are those motorists operating a vehicle on private property.

    Q: Are there exceptions for dialing?
    A: This law does not prohibit reading, selecting or entering a phone number, or name in an electronic wireless device for the purpose of making or receiving a phone call. Drivers are strongly urged not to enter a phone number while driving.

    DRIVERS 18 AND OVER

    Drivers 18 and over are allowed to use a “hands-free” device to talk on their wireless telephone while driving. The following FAQs apply to those motorists 18 and over.

    Q: Does the “hands-free” law prohibit you from dialing a wireless telephone while driving or just talking on it?
    A: The law does not prohibit dialing, but drivers are strongly urged not to dial while driving.

    Q: Is it legal to use a Bluetooth or other earpiece?
    A: Yes, however you cannot have BOTH ears covered.

    Q: Does the “hands-free” law allow you to use the speaker phone function of your wireless telephone while driving?
    A: Yes, as long as you are not holding the phone.

    Q: Does the “hands-free” law allow drivers 18 and over to text message while driving?
    A: No; sending, receiving, or reading text while operating a motor vehicle is prohibited as of January 1, 2009 (VC §23123.5).

    DRIVERS UNDER 18

    Q: Am I allowed to use my wireless telephone “hands-free?”
    A: No. Drivers under the age of 18 may not use a wireless telephone, pager, laptop or any other electronic communication or mobile services device to speak or text while driving in any manner, even “hands-free.” EXCEPTION: Permitted in emergency situations to call police, fire, or medical authorities (VC §23124).

    Q: Why is the law stricter for provisional drivers?
    A: Statistics show that teen drivers are more likely than older drivers to be involved in crashes because they lack driving experience and tend to take greater risks. Teen drivers are vulnerable to driving distractions such as talking with passengers, eating or drinking, and talking or texting on wireless devices, which increase the chance of getting involved in serious vehicle crashes.

    Q: Can my parents give me permission to allow me to use my wireless telephone while driving?
    A: No. The only exception is an emergency situation that requires you to call a law enforcement agency, a health care provider, the fire department, or other emergency entity.

    Q: Does the law apply to me if I’m an emancipated minor?
    A: Yes. The restriction applies to all licensed drivers who are under the age of 18.

    Q: If I have my parent(s) or someone age 25 years or older in the car with me, may I use my wireless telephone while driving?
    A: No. You may only use your wireless telephone in an emergency situation.

    Q: Will the restriction appear on my provisional license?
    A: No.

    Q: May I use the hands-free feature while driving if my car has the feature built in?
    A: No. The law prohibits anyone under the age of 18 from using any type of wireless device while driving, except in an emergency situation.

    Q: Can a law enforcement officer stop me for using my “hands-free” device while driving?
    A: For drivers under the age of 18, this is considered a SECONDARY violation meaning that a law enforcement officer may cite you for using a “hands-free” wireless device if you are pulled over for another violation. However, the prohibition against using a handheld wireless device while driving is a PRIMARY violation for which a law enforcement officer can pull you over.