Atlanta Personal Injury Lawyers Blog

As a personal injury trial lawyer who regularly travels the roads of Atlanta and north Georgia, I am shocked to see other motorists texting as they operate their cars and trucks. With one or both hands off the steering wheel and their eyes focused down on their cell phones, blackberries and I-phones, these reckless individuals seem to have no idea that their vehicles are more deadly and more likely to kill than a loaded gun.

If the driver of a motor vehicle is texting while traveling on a roadway, the likelihood of a very serious accident resulting in catastrophic injuries and death becomes a real possibility. Causing a deadly head-on collision, traveling into an intersection on a red light or through a stop sign, or striking the rear of a vehicle stopped in traffic at a high rate of speed are the likely consequences of a texting driver. Injuries from these types of accidents are often very serious, including, but not limited to, severely broken bones, serious internal injuries, brain damage, disfigurement, paralysis, and death.

Oftentimes it is an innocent victim of the texting driver that is severely injured or killed. It is surprising to me that the Georgia General Assembly has not made it a criminal offense to text while operating any type of motor vehicle on the roads of Georgia. I expect that such legislation will be passed in the future. Indeed, other states already have passed such legislation and the fines and penalties are stiff.

In civil suits arising out of injuries suffered by innocent victims of a texting driver, strong arguments can be made by competent personal injury attorneys that not only compensatory damages should be awarded by the jury (for example, medical bills, lost wages, physical and mental pain and suffering, etc.), but punitive damages are also warranted because of the texting driver's reckless indifference to the consequences. It is my opinion that driving while texting is as reckless as driving while intoxicated or while under the influence of alcohol or drugs (DUI). Juries and our society should have zero tolerance for such behavior.

If you have been injured or a loved on has been killed by a driver texting while operating a motor vehicle, please do not hesitate to call me or my partner to discuss your situation.

The Georgia Supreme Court issued an opinion today having a tremendous impact on personal injury cases, especially automobile accident, trucking and other road wreck cases. Until today, with very few exceptions, negligently injured individuals and the families of loved ones wrongfully killed on the roads of Georgia had 2 years to the day of the wreck to file a lawsuit. In Beneke v. Parker, S08G2078 S08G2082 (9/28/09), the Supreme Court held that in situations where the at-fault driver receives a citation for violating the rules of the road, the two-year statute of limitations is tolled (does not begin to run), until the citation is disposed of. This is a huge.

The facts of the case are straightforward. Ms. Parker was injured in a car accident on April 27, 2005, when she was a passenger in a vehicle which was struck from the rear by Mr. Beneke. Beneke was cited for following too closely. Parker filed a lawsuit against Beneke on May 11, 2007. On motion by Beneke, the trial court first dismissed the lawsuit because it was not filed within the two-year statute of limitations. On reconsideration, however, the trial court vacated it previous order and allowed the case to move forward. The case was appealed to the Georgia Court of Appeals and ultimately to the Supreme Court. Construing Georgia law, the Supreme Court agreed with the trial court and found the complaint was timely filed because the statute of limitations did not begin to run until the traffic citation was disposed of on May 19, 2005.

The Court recognized that its holding would have significant impact on personal injury lawsuits arising out of vehicle accidents by tolling the statute of limitations, but the Court felt that it had no choice but to reach the result it did because of the way the relevant statute (OCGA § 9-3-99) was written. The Court noted that if the legislature did not want the statute to be construed in this way, it certainly could have written it differently. Because it did not, the court reasoned that any undesirable result was a matter properly addressed by the General Assembly rather than the courts. My guess is that when the General Assembly meets next year, it will change the language of the statute to undo the ruling in this case. Until that happens, however, the statute of limitations should be extended in most road wreck cases, giving additional time for the filing of a complaint, because the at-fault party is almost always given a citation for causing the accident by violating the rules of the road.