Hang up and drive
Should wireless phone companies be held liable for car wrecks caused by people talking on their cell phone?
The argument goes like this: The wireless providers know that talking on a cell phone while driving can distract the driver, making them more likely to crash. When they sell a phone and service to a person, they know it is likely that person will use the phone while driving because, hey, that’s what people do with cell phones. Shouldn’t the people who get crashed into by these cell phone distracted drives be able to hold the provider for their injuries?
Not yet, at least in Indiana, the court of appeals said today:
The relationship between Cingular and Williams is remote. Although it is foreseeable that cellular phone use while driving may contribute to a car accident, it is not foreseeable that the sale of a phone to a customer will necessarily result in a car accident. Public policy weighs in favor of not imposing a duty on cellular phone companies for car accidents, even if cellular phones have the potential to distract drivers if misused.
Upon balancing the three factors mentioned in Webb, we conclude that Williams’ attenuated relationship with Cingular and the foregoing public policy considerations substantially outweigh any foreseeability of the harm at issue. Therefore, we must conclude that Cingular did not owe a duty of care to Williams.
