Month: February 2017

California has always been a trend-setting state. And when it comes to trends and innovations in technology, Silicon Valley is second to none. Few innovations are as coveted as fully automated cars. Although they are not ready for mass production yet, chances are good that when they are, the first consumers will be California drivers.

Google has garnered a lot of media attention in recent years for its work on driverless cars. But Google employees are not the only group of innovators working to make human drivers obsolete. Automakers and independent researchers are vigorously pursuing fully automated vehicles, inspired by the promise of driver-less commutes, the elimination of traffic jams and a significant reduction in car accident rates.

To be sure, it is unlikely that fully automated cars could completely eliminate crashes. This raises an interesting question: Who would be legally liable for a car accident when the vehicles weren’t being driven by humans? Currently, drivers who cause car accidents due to distracted driving or other negligent behaviors can face civil lawsuits and, at times, criminal charges.

But once fully automated vehicles become a reality, crash-related personal injury lawsuits as we currently think of them might more often become products liability cases. If and when an accident occurs in a driverless vehicle, it will likely be the result of a software error or vehicle defect. As such, the auto manufacturer could be held liable.

Some might argue that it is premature to start discussing these issues. But it is important to remember that vehicles already contain some automated features like cruise control and parallel parking assistance. Although fully automated cars are not yet commercially available, functional prototypes do exist. And when cars can eventually drive themselves, we need to make sure that we have the legal framework in place to address any issues that arise.

Source: Brookings, “Who Pays for a Car Accident When There is no Driver?” Joshua Bleiberg, April 28, 2014

There have been many proposed solutions to the problem of distracted driving, including new laws, safety campaigns and even cellphone-disabling technology. In spite of these tactics and resources, distracted driving seems to be getting more common rather than less.

Because of this, some have suggested taking a very different approach to distracted driving. This approach says that if we can’t stop or reduce this behavior in drivers, we can at least find ways to make it safer and less likely to cause auto accidents. To that end, some companies are designing new typefaces (fonts) that are easier to read at a glance.

When it comes to road signs and other things that drivers actually need to read, it makes sense to study which typefaces are easiest to read. But is the same true for text messages and in-car “infotainment” systems?

Proponents of the change argue that we cannot stop drivers from texting or engaging in other distractions. As such, we should focus instead on reducing the time and effort needed to read texts and other electronic type. Accident rates could be significantly influenced by differences as small as fractions of a second.

But the above argument assumes that drivers who have an easier time reading typeface would not text or otherwise drive distracted any more often than they do now. Yet it stands to reason that if drivers are already choosing to interact with cellphones and other devices behind the wheel, this dangerous behavior will actually increase if type becomes easier to read. Distracted driving may “feel” less dangerous, giving drivers a false sense of their own ability to multitask.

Distracted driving is one of the most pressing public health concerns in the United States. While reducing or eliminating this behavior will likely require a multi-faceted approach, it might be wise to avoid “solutions” that could make the problem even worse.

Source: The Washington Post, “A remarkably small idea that could reduce distracted driving,” Emily Badger, April 7, 2014

It is common knowledge that drinking alcohol and then getting behind the wheel of a car is not a good idea. Someone could be injured or even killed due to the driver's impairment. California has seen far too many car accidents as a result of drinking and driving. Recently, yet another car accident occurred, and the authorities believe that alcohol could have been a contributing factor.

Highway Patrol officers report that two vehicles were involved in a front-end crash. Fuel from one of the cars began to leak out, causing a fire. Additionally, one of the individuals was trapped in a car and had to be removed from the vehicle. Three individuals were taken the local hospital. One suffered a serious injury while the other two were hurt less severely.

Exact details regarding what happened have yet to be determined. The accident is still under investigation, although authorities have stated that they believe alcohol to be a contributing factor. At this time, it is unknown if blood alcohol testing was used in reaching this opinion.

Additionally, it is not known if traffic related charges will be brought against the driver. Regardless, three individuals were injured in this accident. Those who were not at fault are most likely faced with medical expenses and possibly even loss of income in addition to their pain and suffering as a result of someone else's actions. In an effort to receive compensation for these losses, these individuals may decide to file a personal injury civil suit against the driver in California's civil courts. Car accidents such as this one can have lasting financial and emotional effects on those involved.

Source: turnto23.com, "Head on collision on I-5 and SR 119 closes down soccer park and stops traffic", Nela Lichtscheidl and Tarik Dugas, May 25, 2014

Anyone paying attention to the news recently is well aware that automotive defects can result in serious injury and death. The very delayed General Motors recall over faulty ignition switches is among the latest and most high-profile recall scandals. Prior to the GM recall, the Toyota “sudden acceleration” scandal stayed in the headlines for years.

It is worth noting, however, that individuals may be able to sue automakers for personal injury, products liability or wrongful death even if the allegedly defective vehicle was not subject to recall. Earlier this week, just such a lawsuit was filed in relation to the November 2013 car accident in Southern California that killed actor Paul Walker and a friend.

The star of the “Fast & Furious” franchise was a passenger in a 2005 Porsche Carrera GT driven and owned by a man named Roger W. Rodas. During a drive just a few days after Thanksgiving last year, Rodas lost control of the car and it veered off the road before striking three trees and a light pole. The vehicle then caught fire and both Rodas and Walker were killed.

The official crash investigation by the California Highway Patrol determined that Rodas was driving between 80 and 93 mph in a 45 mph zone, and that unsafe speed was the cause of the crash. The CHP also said that there was nothing inherently defective about the car that would have led to the crash.

But according to a lawsuit filed by Kristine M. Rodas, the car’s design and manufacturing were responsible for the crash. She alleges that her husband was driving only about 55 mph at the time, and the crash occurred because the vehicle lacks proper safety systems and because the car’s suspension system failed.

The details of the alleged defects have to do with features (or lack of features) that would have affected the car’s controllability and crashworthiness. She also claims that if the 2005 Porsche Carrera GT had had a proper racing fuel cell, the vehicle wouldn’t have caught fire after the crash. The victims suffered severe burns as well as impact trauma.

Although Porsche is known for top-of-the-line automobiles, some car experts have independently said that the 2005 Carrera GT suffers from handling and stability problems. It will be interesting to see if these expert opinions will be sought if and when the lawsuit goes to trial.

Source: The Chicago Tribune, “Paul Walker crash victim’s wife hits Porsche with lawsuit,” May 13, 2014

We have written several posts about distracted driving lately. This is, in part because April was Distracted Driving Awareness Month. But we also write about distracted driving frequently because it continues to be a major hazard on roads and highways throughout California.

Despite California’s laws against texting and handheld cellphone use, both of these behaviors remain common. And they are just two of the many of the distracted driving behaviors known to cause auto accidents.

Other distracted driving behaviors include:

• Applying makeup or doing other personal grooming
• Programming a GPS device
• Picking up toys, food or other items dropped by children in the back seat
• Eating or drinking
• Changing the radio station or music in the CD player
• Using your phone for features such as internet browsing or email

Have you engaged in any of these distracted driving behaviors? If you have children, have you done so with them in the car? Many parents don’t realize that they set the driving example their kids will likely follow – even if their kids are nowhere near old enough to drive.

In a recent study conducted in the Midwest, two-thirds of parents admitted that they have talked on their cellphones with their children in the car. Approximately 15 percent of parents said that they have texted while driving with child passengers. In all, about 90 percent of the 570 parents surveyed said that they have engaged in one of the distracted driving behaviors we mentioned above.

Kids are more perceptive than adults give them credit for. Even if you don’t think they notice what mom or dad does behind the wheel, it may influence their own safety choices in the not-too-distant future. Therefore, for the sake of your family’s safety right now and the future wellbeing of your children, please display the driving habits you’ll want your children to imitate.

Source: Michigan Live, “Study: 90 percent of parents admit to distracted driving with child on board,” Amy Biolchini, April 30, 2014

Should we be looking to our elected officials to serve as role models? Certainly, Californians are familiar with politicians behaving badly, and it is not uncommon to hear the term “sex scandal” in reference to many government officials.

But the Bay Area is in the midst of a different kind of political scandal this week involving Oakland Mayor Jean Quan. Earlier this month, Ms. Quan was photographed texting while driving in her Lexus SUV. She quickly apologized and noted that she had “learned her lesson.” Last weekend, however, the mayor was involved in a minor car accident with another driver in West Oakland. That driver claims that Mayor Quan was using her cellphone and had run a red light.

The mayor is denying that she was using her phone at the time of the accident. She has even invited law enforcement officers to scrutinize her call and text logs. It should be noted, however, that drivers may be distracted by their phones even if they aren’t calling or texting at the time.

Ms. Quan seemingly denies running the red light, but admits she is less sure of her innocence on this matter. In February, a traffic camera snapped a picture of her running a red light and she was later convicted for that incident.

To be sure, this incident is pretty tame as far as political scandals go. But considering how many serious car and pedestrian accidents occur in the Bay Area each year, shouldn’t we expect our elected leaders to truly lead when it comes to traffic safety? What do readers think?

Source: San Francisco Chronicle, “Jean Quan busted for running red light before,” Will Kane and Henry K. Lee, June 9, 2014

It is nearly impossible to put a price tag on life and health. They are simply valuable beyond measure. But loss of life and health as well as the costs related to those losses need to be at least estimated in order to raise awareness about key public health issues, and one issue in particular: auto accidents.

According to a recently released report by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the total cost of car accidents (measured by economic loss and societal harm) in 2010 was $871 billion. No matter how safely we drive, each of us pays these costs.

According to the report, these are just some of the factors that contribute to the overall cost of car accidents:

• Emergency services
• Medical and rehabilitation expenses
• Insurance administration costs
• Lost work and productivity
• Property damage
• Losses related to traffic congestion (fuel, time, environmental damage, etc).
• Court and legal expenses
• Costs to employers

The details in the report and the staggering price tag may seem overwhelming. But it’s important to spread the reminder that the majority of car accidents (and related deaths and injuries) are preventable. How much money would we save – and how many lives could we spare – by getting serious about fighting drunk driving and distracted driving?

You may not be able to fix all of society’s car accident problems, but you can do your part to help. And if you or a loved one has been injured or killed by the negligence of another driver, you have the right to seek appropriate compensation.

Source: Click On Detroit, “NHTSA: Car crashes have $871 billion impact on economy, society,” May 29, 2014

By this point, most Americans have heard about the devastating truck accident involving comedian Tracy Morgan. Earlier this month, a truck driver who was dangerously fatigued crashed into a vehicle carrying Morgan and several other passengers. The accident resulted in one death and left Morgan and two others in critical condition.

Drowsy or fatigued driving is a major cause of auto accidents on roads and highways here in California and around the country. Fatigue is especially dangerous in the trucking industry for two reasons. First, due to the way that truck drivers are compensated, miles and time behind the wheel are prioritized over sleep and rest. Second, truck drivers who fall asleep behind the wheel of their giant vehicles often cause truck accidents with multiple fatalities.

Federal regulators have been trying for decades to impose rules that govern hours of service in the trucking industry in an attempt to combat fatigued driving. About a year ago, such rules were enacted. The new hours-of-service rules:

• Reduce maximum weekly driving time from 82 hours to 70 hours
• Limit daily driving time to no more than 11 hours with a mandatory 30-minute break
• Require drivers to take a 34-hour rest break before starting a new weekly driving cycle
• Require that the 34-hour rest break includes two consecutive days where drivers are off the road between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m.

These hours-of-service rules are very reasonable and are based scientific studies about sleep and fatigue. But less than a year after the HOS rules were enacted, trucking industry representatives are already lobbying Congress to freeze or repeal them.

The crash that severely injured Tracy Morgan has brought renewed national attention to the dangers of fatigued truckers, but the problem is ever present. Some 30,000 people per year are killed in accidents on U.S. highways, and approximately one in seven occur in accidents involving large trucks.

The trucking industry wants to roll back these important safety rules in the name of profit and efficiency. But the cost of that tradeoff is simply too high.

Source: The New York Times, “Truckers Resist Rules on Sleep, Despite Risks of Drowsy Driving,” Jad Mouawad and Elizabeth A. Harris, June 16, 2014