Leave them a voice mail message to text you later when you are not driving. Taking your eye off the road for just a second raises the risk of driving off the road or hitting somebody or something.FOCUS,FOCUS, FOCUS!ON THE ROAD ONLY.

This is ridiculous. As far as I'm concerned, if you are operating a motor vehicle, you are responsible for it. You have the power to ignore phone calls and text messages and any other distraction. If you can't, then you shouldn't be behind the wheel. If I'm driving singing along to Front Line Assembly and I get so distracted remembering the early 90s and rear end someone, it's not FLA's fault. It's mine.

Two weekends ago I actually got to observe the effects of texting behind the wheel and the actual texting itself going on. I was stuck behind a woman in a BMW 328 sedan entering Essex St from Millburn Ave and she was weaving between lanes, taking up two lanes, etc. At one point, she even stopped at the intersection of Holmes st as if there was a stop sign there. Her driving was so erratic that I was afraid to pass her.

She finally started moving and I got next to her at the crosswalk light and she was completely heads-down typing away. She could have been drunk the way she was driving, but it was the stupid texting.

Oh, and contrary to the first sentence of the above article, SMS and emails pop up alerts on the front of my phone, and I suspect on many others' phones as well. The difference is that one is green and the other is blue. SMS is faster sending short messages (that's what the first S stands for) than email and crappy old phones can use it.

John,Your statement "You have the power to ignore phone calls and text messages and any other distraction is right on.Putting on make-up,drinking coffee,looking for something you dropped. Like i said Focus on the road,not what your doing in the car.A second can change your life forever.

The one thing that bothers me that should be made a law is moms who push strollers while testing or on a phone. In Hoboken, I've seen numerous mommies walk across streets without looking while on their cell phones, not paying attention to the stroller. I almost hit one 2 years ago while driving and the mother gave you lip when she wasn't even looking to see me turning. She was oblivious to her surroundings.

I believe New Jersey is comparative negligence state. Not sure how that could play into something like this, if any.

It's absurd that the sender of a text message could be held liable for the actions of the recipient of a text message. For example, I can receive a text message from the Police Department itself about a road closure or a school lockdown. Do they know what I will be doing at the time that they send the message? Absolutely not. It's up to me, the recipient of that message on my phone to use my common sense and not read or respond to it when I'm driving or focusing on any task at hand that requires my undivided attention.

Rory, does it ever bother you when someone starts a storyline about one thing, and people have a hard time staying on point, taking it to another tangent? If so, try to pause and reflect before submitting.

ALL,you see that white line in the road,It's called the side of the road.It is where you should go when you get a phone call or text.PULL OVER,DON'T DRIVE WHILE TEXTING OR TALKING ON THE PHONE!!!CAN'T BE ANY CLEARER THAN THAT!!

This is just a matter of the victims’ attorney going for all he can. That’s his job. The sender of a message is no more responsible than the person on the other end of a cell phone call. If I am driving and my phone goes off ( I do not get text messages) I just let it go into VM and pick it up latter. That’s why we have VM for crying out loud. The guy who was reading that message should have the book thrown at him.

This would be tantamount to suing someone for phoning a cell phone and having the other person answer or not answer it while driving... I'm sorry for the plaintiff's but their suit against the girlfriend has no merit. The boyfriend could have chosen not to text her back.

Rich, That's why they put voice mail on phones.

The fact this is even arising is the result of government creeping further into everyday life over a trivial issue. Please people a little personal responsibility.

How ridiculous!!! The sender has no idea of what the recipient is doing at the time they send a text!!! On the receiving end, the receiver has the responsibility to read the message when they can do it safely!! If any judge rules that the sender is in any way responsible, our legal system is in BIG trouble!!!

Dweezie, Have you seen some of the judgements lately from judges? Nothing would surprise me! How ridiculous is this? Stay tuned, this should. be interesting.

Dweezie, They give them raises for being out of touch.

This is absurd and would set a horrible precedent.

No. In a word.

Maybe the Kuberts should also sue the state or the feds, because they did not protect us enough. Then again, maybe Best should the state ot the feds for the same reason. After all, we are ALL potected in such a nanny state, right?

America has a dysfunctional relationship with personal responsibility.

Drive drunk, hit a tree, and sue the squirrel who buried the acorn!

From the federal government on down to preschoolers (or should that be "up"?), "It's not my fault!"

Bandannaman, Don't forget the phone company,they have to be sued to.

Tests have shown that texting has the same effect on driving as being 2x - 3x the legal limit for alcohol. In some respects, it's actually worse than drunk driving.

At the very least, the victims should have to be able to prove--not just claim--that the girlfriend knew he was driving at the time and carried on a text conversation with him knowing and expecting, maybe even demanding, that he would immediately reply to her texts. I can think of 1 or 2 girlfriends I once had who were capable of making such a demand (but they didn't staygirlfriends for long!). Conceivably, in some cases this could be shown by a transcript of the chat.

And I still think it would be a bad rule. From then on, a cautious person would want to immediately hang up if he knew or suspected that the other party to the call might be driving. It's an unreasonable burden to place on someone when the driver has the ability to decide not to accept the call or text or to pull over before doing so.

As per NJ.com, Judge granted the motion to dismiss - as he should have. Another stupid legal action. Gotta love lawyers.

I'm sorry but this is outrageous! How could someone sending a text be expected to know, or worse,, be held responsible for some receiving the text while driving. It's the death of common sense again. Clearly, it should be the responsibility of the driver NOT to immediately open, read or otherwise review the text message that they received IF THEY HAPPEN TO BE DRIVING!!!

Another thought,

What about situations in which workplaces require or pressure their employees to always pick up their cell phones immediately no matter where they are or, as the case may be, to read and respond to text messages immediately?

I can imagine situations in which employees might feel compelled to take the risk, or else get in trouble with a tyrannical boss because they lack power to ask their boss to wait to be called/texted back. I can also imagine situations in which an employee may very well need to be reached for legitimate reasons of urgency, such as a surgeon who needs to get to the hospital immediately for an emergency surgery.

No matter which way the judge ruled on Friday, both sides were already prepared with their appellate briefs. This issue will drag on for a couple of more years as it makes its way all the way up to Stu Rabner & The Supremes.

Many cars have Bluetooth today. The problem is though, syncing it with your phone requires a little bit of sequential button pushing that a lot of people can't be bothered to spend a few minutes getting the hang of. The other problem is Bluetooth connectivity really only covers hands-free talking conversations ... not texting. Texting has become incredibly popular, and for drivers, it means either waiting to end of journey or pull over to read/respond, or do it while you are driving. If you have been looking into moving cars lately, you might have noticed some really inattentive driving, or if you have been following a car, you might have witnessed some really twitchy, erratic driving. Testing while driving, in my opinion, is probably more dangerous than driving while mildly intoxicated.

I know. Typing in a 4 digit PIN that's displayed on the dashboard is so difficult. I can't think of anything that a normal idiot would have to deal with in daily life that requires a challenge/response action. It's also not like any 12 year old kid could master the process in about 15 seconds without consulting the manual. You're right. They can't be bothered. They're lazy and they don't care.

I also agree with you about the texting. If you read my post (#3 at the top), you'll see my direct experience with texting=drive like a drunk. When I pulled up along side, I would have more expected to see a bottle of Absolute in her hand than an iPhone. It was the longest sustained erratic driving I've ever seen. This was in the middle of a busy Saturday afternoon in the middle of Millburn, on the actual street where the MPD is headquartered. She was able to continue on her way unfettered by the rule of law.

Had she been drunk and driving the same way, I guess she would have gotten away with it, unless she actually ran into something like a telephone pole or a human.

DRIVING-NO TALKING,TEXTING,EATING DRINKING,SMOKING,MAKE-UP,YELLING AT KIDS IN BACKSEAT. PAY ATTENTION TO THE ROAD AND DRIVE!!!THAT IS ALL!!!

This accident could have easily been avoided with a simple phone call by her,but whats is happening these days people when you call them after there last text,they wont answer,...so what could have taken a min by phone now took about 50 to 60 texts between these two idiots,and her knowing very well he was driving,but him always engaging with another text.....If i text you i expect you to call me back not engage in this back and forth texting insanity!...im sure texts now becoming more then minutes allowed,someone needs to take away their unlimited texting to stop these two from killing someone in the future

I agree.... but I still think it comes down to personal responsibility... the DRIVER, should be held responsible... and the punishment should be harsh... THAT is what works... PUNISHMENT... we have plenty of laws that protect us... the problem is the punishments... think about this... video footage of you texting while driving = loss of driving privilege for 5 years.... will you text while driving???? after a few of these well published punishmnets.. I bet most will stop this insane practice..

This resembles the same level of idiocy as the woman who sued that her coffee was too hot.

GGG,The time has to fit the crime.Wrist slapping can't be tolarated anymore.You hurt or kill anybody while driving, TIME has to HARSH,and not plea bargained.AN EYE FOR AN EYE, .A NOSE ALWAYS NOSE!!

It's illegal to be held responsible. How are you to know where the person is or when they read the message.
Another reason for Jacoby & Meyers. Are litigators lobbying for this? Why don't they hold the cell phone company and carrier responsible as well.
This is inane...................

@John...I can see the relationship with the coffee story. And you brought two really good points out to support O.J.'s point...she had the hot coffee between her legs putting sugar in, thus the hot coffee landed on her legs vs. spilling onto a table. And also the coffee was at a standard temperature in that given time period. I feel for the woman for sure and if she wanted to sue for the medical expenses, I guess...but for 2mil when McDs didn't violate a temperature standard or tell her to sweeten her coffee by using her legs as hands?

There are too many lawyers in this country. That's why we get bs lawsuits like this one. It's time to close 50 percent of the law schools in America. Let's start with the one at Seton Hole.

If we all take a moment to think about these stupid lawsuits we will begin to ralize that this is what causes our auto and health insurance rates to be so high. People sue for every dam thing and lawyers are making like fat cats.

oops realize

Thank you, Andy. I obviously have no legal background but when you put it in a clear and concise context, as you did, it makes much more sense. It's still a lot of money! But I get your point for sure.