Skip to Main Content


Texting A Driver? Red Light.

Peter J. Weishaar
Aug 8, 2018
More Posts

By Peter J. Weishaar

Courts have held that a passenger in a car may be liable if he or she distracts a driver immediately before an accident.  But what about a person sending text messages to someone they know is driving?  

On a dark, rainy night, a man and a woman were driving toward each other on Route 33 in Genesee County.  The man was driving home from work and texting with his girlfriend.  As the vehicles approached each other, his vehicle crossed the center line and collided with the woman's vehicle, killing him and seriously injuring her.

Police determined that the primary cause of the accident was the man's failure to keep to the right of the center line.  There was no evidence that he tried to take evasive action just before the crash - - suggesting that he was driving distracted.  Investigators concluded that the texting “may have been the source of this distraction.”

The injured woman sued the man's girlfriend, “alleging that the collision was caused in part by her negligence in continuing to engage [the man] in a text message conversation despite knowing, or having special reason to know, that he was operating a motor vehicle.”

The trial court granted the girlfriend's motion for summary judgment, dismissing the complaint against her, and the injured woman appealed.  The Appellate Division affirmed, holding that a “person does not owe a common-law duty to motorists to refrain from sending a text message to a person whom he or she knows, or reasonably should know, is operating a motor vehicle.” The Court based its decision on three factors:

  • Noting “a significant distinction between the distracting passenger and the remote sender of text messages,” the Court reasoned that a driver cannot prevent a passenger–who is actually inside the vehicle–from creating a distraction.  However, the same driver “has complete control over whether to allow the conduct of the remote sender to create a distraction.” It is the driver’s duty to see what should be seen and to exercise reasonable care when driving to avoid a collision with another vehicle.
  • The Court also pointed to the danger of opening liability floodgates: “If a person were to be held liable for communicating a text message to another person whom he or she knows or reasonably should know is operating a vehicle, such a holding could logically be expanded to encompass all manner of heretofore innocuous activities.  A billboard, a sign outside a church, or a child’s lemonade stand could all become a potential source of liability in a negligence action.  Each of the foregoing examples is a communication directed specifically at a passing motorist and intended to divert their attention from the highway.”
  • Finally, in reviewing the various laws passed to regulate the use of cellular telephones and other electronic devices by those operating motor vehicles, the Court noted that in passing these laws, the legislature did not create a duty to refrain from communicating with persons known to be operating a motor vehicle.  Instead, “those laws place the responsibility of managing or avoiding the distractions caused by electronic devices squarely with the driver.”

We advise clients who have been seriously injured by the negligence or intentional misconduct of others. Our team handles only those cases where legitimate, significant harm has been sustained: We set wrongs right. Our compassionate, personal approach sets us apart from other firms. We don't spend our resources on billboards; we spend them on you. Our smaller caseload allows us to provide more individual attention to clients, enhancing the likelihood of securing a recovery commensurate with your injury. For assistance with these matters, please contact a member of our personal injury practice

This publication is intended as an information source for clients, prospective clients, and colleagues and constitutes attorney advertising. The content should not be considered legal advice and readers should not act upon information in this publication without individualized professional counsel.

About MCCM

McConville Considine Cooman & Morin, P.C. is a full-service law firm based in Rochester, New York, providing high-quality legal services to businesses and individuals since 1979.  With over a dozen attorneys and a full paralegal support staff, the firm is well-positioned to right-size services tailored to each client. We are large enough to provide expertise in a broad range of practice areas, yet small enough to devote prompt, personal attention to our clients.

We represent a diverse range of clients located throughout New York State and New England.  They include individuals, numerous manufacturing and service industry businesses, local governments, and health care professionals, provider groups, facilities and associations. We also serve as local counsel to out-of-state clients and their attorneys who have litigation pending in Western New York courts.  For more information, please contact us at 585.546.2500.