Negligence Per Se: When Law Violations Equal Negligence
In most states, texting while driving is illegal. This creates a powerful legal doctrine called "negligence per se," which means that violating a safety statute automatically establishes negligence—you don't need additional evidence of carelessness.
How Negligence Per Se Works: Normally, you must prove the defendant failed to exercise reasonable care. With negligence per se, proving the defendant violated a safety law (like the texting ban) automatically satisfies this element. You still need to prove the violation caused your injuries, but the negligence question is settled.
State-by-State Variations: While 49 states ban texting while driving (Missouri is the exception for adults), the specific laws vary. Some states ban all handheld phone use, while others only prohibit texting. Some have primary enforcement (police can pull you over solely for phone use), while others require a secondary offense. Our attorneys understand the specific laws in your state and how they apply to your case.
Exceptions and Defenses: Defendants may argue they were using the phone for navigation (sometimes exempt), making an emergency call (usually exempt), or that the phone was in hands-free mode. We anticipate and counter these defenses through thorough evidence gathering.
How Negligence Per Se Works: Normally, you must prove the defendant failed to exercise reasonable care. With negligence per se, proving the defendant violated a safety law (like the texting ban) automatically satisfies this element. You still need to prove the violation caused your injuries, but the negligence question is settled.
State-by-State Variations: While 49 states ban texting while driving (Missouri is the exception for adults), the specific laws vary. Some states ban all handheld phone use, while others only prohibit texting. Some have primary enforcement (police can pull you over solely for phone use), while others require a secondary offense. Our attorneys understand the specific laws in your state and how they apply to your case.
Exceptions and Defenses: Defendants may argue they were using the phone for navigation (sometimes exempt), making an emergency call (usually exempt), or that the phone was in hands-free mode. We anticipate and counter these defenses through thorough evidence gathering.
Comparative Negligence and Distracted Driving
Insurance companies often try to shift blame to accident victims, arguing they share fault. Understanding comparative negligence is crucial:
Pure Comparative Fault States: In states like California, New York, and Florida (for cases before 2023), you can recover damages even if you're 99% at fault—your recovery is just reduced by your fault percentage.
Modified Comparative Fault States: Most states use this system, which bars recovery if you're 50% or 51% at fault (depending on the state). Proving the other driver was distracted becomes critical when fault is contested.
How Distraction Evidence Defeats Comparative Fault Arguments: When we can prove the other driver was texting, it's difficult for them to argue you were mostly at fault. Jurors understand that a texting driver creates the hazard—and victims can only do so much to avoid someone who isn't watching the road.
Common Defense Arguments: The defense might claim you were speeding, failed to signal, or didn't take evasive action. We counter these arguments with evidence showing the distracted driver created an unavoidable collision.
Pure Comparative Fault States: In states like California, New York, and Florida (for cases before 2023), you can recover damages even if you're 99% at fault—your recovery is just reduced by your fault percentage.
Modified Comparative Fault States: Most states use this system, which bars recovery if you're 50% or 51% at fault (depending on the state). Proving the other driver was distracted becomes critical when fault is contested.
How Distraction Evidence Defeats Comparative Fault Arguments: When we can prove the other driver was texting, it's difficult for them to argue you were mostly at fault. Jurors understand that a texting driver creates the hazard—and victims can only do so much to avoid someone who isn't watching the road.
Common Defense Arguments: The defense might claim you were speeding, failed to signal, or didn't take evasive action. We counter these arguments with evidence showing the distracted driver created an unavoidable collision.
Multiple Liable Parties in Distracted Driving Cases
While the distracted driver is the obvious defendant, other parties may share liability:
Employers: If the driver was working when the accident occurred, their employer may be vicariously liable through "respondeat superior." This is common with delivery drivers, truckers, and sales representatives. Commercial insurance policies typically have higher limits than personal auto policies.
Vehicle Owners: If the driver borrowed someone else's vehicle, the owner's insurance may provide additional coverage under permissive use provisions.
Government Entities: In rare cases, dangerous road design or missing signage may contribute to accidents. Claims against government entities have strict notice requirements and shorter deadlines.
Phone and App Companies: Some lawsuits have targeted tech companies for designing addictive apps, though these claims face significant legal hurdles.
Our attorneys investigate all potentially liable parties to maximize available insurance coverage and ensure you receive full compensation for your injuries.
Employers: If the driver was working when the accident occurred, their employer may be vicariously liable through "respondeat superior." This is common with delivery drivers, truckers, and sales representatives. Commercial insurance policies typically have higher limits than personal auto policies.
Vehicle Owners: If the driver borrowed someone else's vehicle, the owner's insurance may provide additional coverage under permissive use provisions.
Government Entities: In rare cases, dangerous road design or missing signage may contribute to accidents. Claims against government entities have strict notice requirements and shorter deadlines.
Phone and App Companies: Some lawsuits have targeted tech companies for designing addictive apps, though these claims face significant legal hurdles.
Our attorneys investigate all potentially liable parties to maximize available insurance coverage and ensure you receive full compensation for your injuries.