State Laws Regarding Cell Phone Use and Texting While Driving

Driver distraction, to include cell phone use, is a major cause of wrecks. This is a huge issue in the trucking industry as truck drivers are required to frequently update their company and are on the road weeks at a time, leaving the cell phone their only means of communication with vendors, friends, and family.

Proving that a truck or bus driver was actually texting while driving, or on a cell phone, is difficult and generally requires a lawyer. Records must be subpoened from the service provider. These records are often destroyed after a few months, thus having a lawyer fighting for you in a serious truck or bus accident case is critical.

Paralegal superstar Janabeth Fleming Taylor recently sent me the link to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's list of cell phone laws in the US. The list can be seen here and is pasted below for your convenience.

 

Cellphone laws

July 2010


A jurisdiction-wide ban on driving while talking on a hand-held cellphone is in place in 9 states (California, Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Utah, and Washington) and the District of Columbia. Utah has named the offense careless driving. Under the Utah law, no one commits an offense when speaking on a cellphone unless they are also committing some other moving violation other than speeding.

Local jurisdictions may or may not need specific state statutory authority to ban cellphones. Localities that have enacted restrictions on cellphone use include: Oahu, HI; Chicago, IL; Brookline, MA; Detroit, MI; Santa Fe, NM; Brooklyn, North Olmstead, and Walton Hills, OH; Conshohocken, Lebanon, and West Conshohocken, PA; Waupaca County, WI; and Cheyenne, WY.

The use of all cellphones while driving a school bus is prohibited in 19 states and the District of Columbia.

The use of all cellphones by novice drivers is restricted in 28 states and the District of Columbia.

Text messaging is banned for all drivers in 30 states and the District of Columbia. In addition, novice drivers are banned from texting in 8 states (Alabama, Indiana, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, and West Virginia) and school bus drivers are banned from text messaging in 2 states (Oklahoma, and Texas).

The table below shows the states that have cellphone laws, whether they specifically ban text messaging, and whether they are enforced as primary or secondary laws. Under secondary laws, an officer must have some other reason to stop a vehicle before citing a driver for using a cellphone. Laws without this restriction are called primary.

 
  Laws restricting cellphone use and texting
State Hand-held ban Young drivers all cellphone ban Bus drivers all cellphone ban Texting ban Enforcement
Alabama no drivers age 16 and 17-year-old drivers who have held an intermediate license for fewer than 6 months no drivers age 16 and 17-year-old drivers who have held an intermediate license for fewer than 6 months primary
Alaska no no no all drivers primary
Arizona no no school bus drivers no primary
Arkansas drivers 18 or older but younger than 21 drivers younger than 18 school bus drivers all drivers primary: texting by all drivers and cellphone use by school bus drivers; secondary: cellphone use by young drivers1
California all drivers drivers younger than 18 school and transit bus drivers all drivers primary; secondary for hands-free cellphone use by young drivers1
Colorado no drivers younger than 18 no all drivers primary
Connecticut all drivers drivers younger than 18 school bus drivers all drivers primary
Delaware all drivers (effective 01/02/11) learner's permit and intermediate license holders school bus drivers all drivers (effective 01/02/11) primary
District of Columbia all drivers learner's permit holders school bus drivers all drivers primary
Florida no no no no not applicable
Georgia no drivers younger than 18 school bus drivers all drivers primary
Hawaii no no no no not applicable
Idaho no no no no not applicable
Illinois drivers in construction and school speed zones drivers younger than 19 and learner's permit holders younger than 19 school bus drivers all drivers primary
Indiana no drivers younger than 18 no drivers younger than 18 primary
Iowa no learner's permit and intermediate license holders no all drivers primary for learner's permit and intermediate license holders; secondary for texting
Kansas no learner's permit and intermediate license holders no all drivers primary
Kentucky no drivers younger than 18 school bus drivers all drivers primary
Louisiana with respect to novice drivers, see footnote2 with respect to novice drivers, see footnote2 school bus drivers all drivers primary2 (effective 08/15/10)
Maine no learner's permit and intermediate license holders no learner's permit and intermediate license holders primary
Maryland all drivers (effective 10/01/10) learner's permit and provisional license holders younger than 18 (effective 10/01/10) school bus drivers (hand-held ban) (effective 10/01/10) all drivers secondary; primary for texting
Massachusetts no drivers younger than 18 (effective 09/30/10) school bus drivers (effective since 4/12/01) and passenger bus drivers (effective 09/30/10) all drivers (effective 09/30/10) primary
Michigan no no no all drivers primary
Minnesota no learner's permit holders and provisional license holders during the first 12 months after licensing school bus drivers all drivers primary
Mississippi no no no learner's permit and intermediate license holders primary
Missouri no no no drivers 21 and younger primary
Montana no no no no not applicable
Nebraska no learner's permit and intermediate license holders younger than 18 no all drivers secondary
Nevada no no no no not applicable
New Hampshire no no no all drivers primary
New Jersey all drivers learner's permit and intermediate license holders school bus drivers all drivers primary
New Mexico no no no no not applicable
New York all drivers no no all drivers primary; secondary for text messaging
North Carolina no drivers younger than 18 school bus drivers all drivers primary
North Dakota no no no no not applicable
Ohio no no no no not applicable
Oklahoma learner's permit and intermediate license holders (effective 11/01/10) no3 school bus drivers and public transit drivers (effective 11/01/10) learner's permit holders, intermediate license holders, school bus drivers and public transit drivers (effective 11/01/10) primary (effective 11/01/10)
Oregon all drivers drivers younger than 18 no all drivers primary
Pennsylvania no no no no not applicable
Rhode Island no drivers younger than 18 school bus drivers all drivers primary
South Carolina no no no no not applicable
South Dakota no no no no not applicable
Tennessee no learner's permit and intermediate license holders school bus drivers all drivers primary
Texas drivers in school crossing zones intermediate license holders for the first twelve months bus drivers when a passenger 17 and younger is present bus drivers when a passenger 17 and younger is present; intermediate license holders for first twelve months; drivers in school crossing zones primary
Utah all drivers no no all drivers primary for texting; secondary for talking on a hand-held cellphone4
Vermont no drivers younger than 18 no all drivers primary
Virginia no drivers younger than 18 school bus drivers all drivers secondary; primary for school bus drivers
Washington all drivers learner's permit and intermediate license holders no all drivers primary
West Virginia no drivers younger than 18 who hold either a learner's permit or an intermediate license no drivers younger than 18 who hold either a learner's permit or an intermediate license primary
Wisconsin no no no all drivers (effective 12/01/10) primary (effective 12/01/10)
Wyoming no no no all drivers primary

1The laws in Arkansas and California prohibit police from stopping a vehicle to determine if a driver is in compliance with the law. Clearly, that language prohibits the use of checkpoints to enforce the law, but it has been interpreted as the functional equivalent of secondary provisions that typically state the officer may not stop someone suspected of a violation unless there is other, independent, cause for a stop.

2In Louisiana, all learner's permit holders, irrespective of age, and all intermediate license holders are prohibited from driving while using a hand-held cellphone and all drivers younger than 18 are prohibited from using any cellphone. Effective April 1, 2010 all drivers, irrespective of age, issued a first driver’s license will be prohibited from using a cellphone for one year. The cellphone ban is secondary for novice drivers age 18 and older.

3In Oklahoma, learner's permit and intermediate license holders are banned from using a hand-held electronic device while operating a motor vehicle for non-life-threatening emergency purposes.

4Utah's law defines careless driving as committing a moving violation (other than speeding) while distracted by use of a hand-held cellphone or other activities not related to driving.

 

MCS-90 Endorsement Acts as Surety Not as Additional Insurance

A recent case will have significant impact on truck accident attorneys and lawyers litigating insurance coverage in trucking cases. In Carolina Casualty v. Yeates, 584 F.3d 868 (10th Cir. 2009) (en banc), the court held that the MCS-90 Endorsement applies as surety coverage when the underlying insurance policy to which it is attached provides no coverage for the loss and the motor carrier’s insurance coverage is not sufficient, IN AGGREGATE, to satisfy the federally prescribed minimum levels of financial responsibility.

As a result of Yeates, Defendant trucking companies and insurers will argue that an insurer’s MCS-90 coverage does not come into play when a plaintiff has already received a payment, from all sources, equal to the minimum statutory insurance coverage amount. See Also: Casper v. American Intl S. Ins. Co., 2009 WL 4984797 (Wis. App.)

 

 The Truck Accident Lawyers at the Law Offices of Morgan Adams concentrate in protecting the rights of those who were seriously injured or lost a loved one in an accident with a commercial truck or bus. Our lawyers are based in Tennessee, but serve clients throughout the nation. If you or someone you love has been seriously hurt by a careless driver, don’t sign anything the trucking company gives you -- contact us as soon as possible at 866-580-4878 or by email to learn more at a free, confidential consultation.

 Morgan Adams is a trial attorney licensed in Tennessee and Georgia. He is listed as a "Mid-South SuperLawyer" (Limited to the top 5% of the lawyers in Tennessee, Mississippi, and Arkansas), is a member of the Million Dollar Advocates Forum (limited to lawyers who have recovered 1 million dollars or more for their clients), and is the Chair of the American Association of Justice's Interstate Trucking Litigation Group. He has served as chair of the Tennessee Association of Justice's Trucking Litigation seminars since 2004, and is a frequent speaker at national legal education programs, training lawyers to properly handle injury cases involving commercial vehicles. 

 

Brain Injuries are Common Injuries in Truck Wrecks. Does Your Lawyer Have Expertise With Brain Injuries?

One of the injuries that is of greatest concern for those involved in a truck wreck is a brain injury. While severe brain injuries are easy to identify, mild traumatic brain injuries are not. Explaining the way the brain was injured, and proving to a jury the long term impact of having a brain injury when the victim looks normal, requires training and expertise. I previously blogged on the requirements a competent trucking lawyer should have but I neglected including expertise in handling brain injuries.

Please keep in mind that even though doctors will frequently use the term "mild" to describe many brain injuries, there is nothing mild about brain damage. The use of "mild" by a doctor only means that the person isn' t dead or in a coma. If someones brain is damaged, they have lost their future. They may have memory problems that will have caused them to lose their past. They will never be everything they could have been, even if they do everything they can to try to recover. 

Mild brain injuries typically occur from a wave effect. The brain is like jello, made up primarily of water and is encased in one of the hardest bones in the body, the skull. Because the brain is somewhat fluid, in a wreck it can move and strike the skull. The cells are torn under the forces involved in a wreck. Current medical science makes it clear that it is not necessary for the head to have hit anything in order for brain damage to occur.

Personalities change, memory becomes a problem, frustration and anger are not uncommon. The victim however is able to talk. They don't want to admit anything is wrong, and the family is just so happy for the victim to be alive that they blame the changes on other problems. A questionnaire can help experts determine whether there is a mild traumatic brain injury such as the one that can be downloaded here: Symptom Questionnaire.

If you think someone you love has had some of the changes discussed above have them tested by a neuropsychologist. These are the trained professionals best able to determine whether or not a mild traumatic brain injury has occurred.

 

Preventing Tractor Trailer Rollovers

Training remains the number one way to prevent truck rollovers according to government and industry officials. A 2007 report by Battelle Memorial Institute for the FMCSA found “75% [of rollovers] are attributed to driver error.” The primary cause was running off the road, caused by driver fatigue or inattentiveness.”

Trucking companies could reduce rollovers by the following: Lowering a trailer 3” would reduce rollovers approximately 12% annually. A wider trailer track, from 96” to 102”, would reduce rollover’s 17%. The study found the average cost of a rollover was $600,000 and that for every dollar spent on stability control devices the company would save $2.20. According to Steve Niswander, vice president of safety and policy regulatory relations for Groendyke Transport, driver training is still the most effective way to present crashes. (See Transportation Topics, December 10, 2007, p11)

Responsibility for Truck Rollovers

In a Tractor Trailer rollovers, who is to blame is frequently a major issue. Federal regulations generally require the driver to bear responsibility for the loading, and faulty loading, of the trailer. However an exception is made for loads that are sealed. www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulations/administration/fmcsr/fmcsrruletext.asp Who then is responsible? Generally speaking it is the company that loaded and sealed the trailer. Frequently these companies point at the driver and blame him for excessive speed and allege this is the real cause of the collision. While this may be a cause in wrecks, there are a number where the driver is as much of a victim as any other innocent party and,  it is the company that improperly loaded the trailer who is truly at fault.

In 2002 new rules on securing cargo were adopted that went into effect  Jan 1, 2004. www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulations/truck/vehicle/cs-policy.htm The new rules require motor carriers to change the way they use cargo securement devices to prevent articles from shifting on or within, or falling from commercial motor vehicles. The changes may require motor carriers to increase the number of tie-downs used to secure certain types of cargo. If you have a case where a truck rolled over, or material fell off of a truck. these rules would also apply to those companies loading and sealing trailers. It is critical that experts be retained as soon as possible to determine if a cargo securement issue is involved in a collision, and to determine who is at fault for the improperly loaded trailer.