kalikshama
Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010 Status: offline
|
I'm with Colonna's lawyer: http://redtape.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/22/11797573-could-you-be-sued-for-texting-with-a-driver-experts-say-maybe?lite There's a simple three-pronged test to prove someone is partly to blame for causing an injury by aiding and abetting someone else. It is set out in the Restatement of Torts published by the American Law Institute, which guides most civil courtrooms: 1) The party the defendant assists must do a wrongful act; 2) The party must be generally aware of his or her role in the illegal or "tortuous" act; 3) The party must "substantially assist" in the principal violation. Weinstein think his argument is easy to make. The driver violated the law by texting while driving. Colonna, the text sender, should have known that Best was driving home from work and had to know texting while driving was a violation, he said. Therefore, it's hard to argue that a text sender isn't substantially assisting in the creation of a text message conversation that violates New Jersey's driving laws. "That very comfortably satisfies the third prong of the legal test," he said. Colonna’s lawyer, Joseph McGlone, doesn't think the argument has any merit, and has asked Morris County Superior Court Judge David Rand to dismiss the case. Rand is scheduled to rule this week on McGlone’s motion to dismiss the case. The sender of a text message has no way to control or predict when the recipient will read it, McGlone argues. "The sender of the text has the right to assume the recipient will read it at a safe time,” McGlone told the local Daily Record newspaper. “It’s not fair. It’s not reasonable. Shannon Colonna has no way to control when Kyle Best is going to read that message."
|