Oklahoma Woman Seeking Redress from Cellphone Company - Courts Look at Liability of Cellphone Companies When Users Cause Accidents While Talking on Cellphones
The New York Times recently wrote an article about an Oklahoma woman who has filed a lawsuit against a major cellphone company. The woman's mother was killed in a motor vehicle accident last year when a pickup truck crashed into the mother's car. At the time of the collision, the driver of the pickup truck was using his cellphone and later explained to the police he had become distracted by talking on the cellphone, which caused him to run a red light causing the collision.
Based on the article, it appears the cellphone company involved is Sprint Nextel. The daughter is arguing in her claim that Sprint Nextel should have foreseen the danger causing her mother's death and provided adequate warnings to prevent the harm. The article reports this to be one of only a handful of such cases ever filed.
Indiana courts have ruled on a similar case. In Williams v. Cingular Wireless, a driver was injured in a two-car motor vehicle accident. 809 N.E.2d 473 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004), transfer denied. At the time of the collision, the other driver involved was talking on her cellphone serviced by Cingular Wireless.
The driver's complaint plead that Cingular was negligent in furnishing the cellphone when "it knew, or should have known, that it would be used while the user operated a motor vehicle." Cingular Wireless had a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss granted and the Indiana Court of Appeals heard the case on appeal.
The Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court holding that no relationship existed between the injured driver and Cingular as to create a duty. It also held that while it is foreseeable people will use cellphones while driving, to a "legally significant extent," it is not foreseeable that a driver talking on his/her cellphone would cause a motor vehicle accident.
Also, from a public policy standpoint, the Indiana Court of Appeals held that putting a duty on cellphone companies in this context would "effectively require the companies to stop selling cellular phones entirely because the companies have no way of preventing customers from using the phones while driving." It explained the responsibility of the accident in these situations should fall on the driver.
