Last week, the French government requested that Apple stop selling the iPhone 12 model because of excessive radiation detected during recent tests. The Agence National des Fréquences [ANFR] stated that “…Apple must immediately take all measures to prevent the availability on the market of the phones concerned present in the supply chain. Regarding phones already sold, Apple must take corrective measures as soon as possible to make the phones concerned compliant. Otherwise, it will be up to Apple to recall them.”
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query cell phone. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query cell phone. Sort by date Show all posts
Saturday, September 23, 2023
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
IARC To Issue Report on Cell Phones
The use of cell phones in the course of employment is a major concern as it results in distracted driving accidents. The new report will determine if employer mandated cell phone use can be causally connected to occupational cancer claims.
For over 3 decades the Law Offices of Jon L. Gelman 1.973.696.7900 jon@gelmans.com have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered occupational accidents and illnesses.
For over 3 decades the Law Offices of Jon L. Gelman 1.973.696.7900 jon@gelmans.com have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered occupational accidents and illnesses.
Tuesday, June 23, 2015
Workers' Exposure to Low Dose Radiation Linked to Leukemia and Lymphoma
Workers exposed to low doses of radiation have been reported to experience an increased risk to Leukemia and Lymphoma.
A study published in The Lancet reports strong evidence of positive associations between protracted low-dose radiation exposure and leukemia.
Evidence before this study:
Ionising radiation causes leukaemia. The primary quantitative basis for radiation protection standards comes from studies of populations exposed to acute, high doses of ionising radiation. Although previous studies of nuclear workers addressed leukaemia radiogenicity, questions remain about the size of the risk from protracted radiation exposure in occupational settings.
Added value of this study:
We report a positive dose–response relationship between cumulative, external, protracted, low-dose exposure to ionising radiation, and subsequent death caused by leukeamia (excluding chronic lymphocytic leukaemia). The risk coefficient per unit dose was consistent with those derived from analyses of other populations exposed to higher radiation doses and dose rates.
Implications of all the available evidence:
The present study provides strong evidence of a positive association between radiation exposure and leukaemia even for low-dose exposure. This finding shows the importance of adherence to the basic principles of radiation protection—to optimise protection to reduce exposures as much as reasonably achievable and—in the case of patient exposure—to justify that the exposure does more good than harm.
A study published in The Lancet reports strong evidence of positive associations between protracted low-dose radiation exposure and leukemia.
Evidence before this study:
Ionising radiation causes leukaemia. The primary quantitative basis for radiation protection standards comes from studies of populations exposed to acute, high doses of ionising radiation. Although previous studies of nuclear workers addressed leukaemia radiogenicity, questions remain about the size of the risk from protracted radiation exposure in occupational settings.
Added value of this study:
We report a positive dose–response relationship between cumulative, external, protracted, low-dose exposure to ionising radiation, and subsequent death caused by leukeamia (excluding chronic lymphocytic leukaemia). The risk coefficient per unit dose was consistent with those derived from analyses of other populations exposed to higher radiation doses and dose rates.
Implications of all the available evidence:
The present study provides strong evidence of a positive association between radiation exposure and leukaemia even for low-dose exposure. This finding shows the importance of adherence to the basic principles of radiation protection—to optimise protection to reduce exposures as much as reasonably achievable and—in the case of patient exposure—to justify that the exposure does more good than harm.
Friday, September 23, 2011
Bad Cases Make Bad Law
Guest Blog by Thomas M. Domer
The Illinois legislature just passed a law in response to a notorious claim in which a Sheriff Deputy, driving more than 100 miles per hour while using his cell phone, crossed a median and slammed into a car, killing two teenage sisters.
The claim drew regional and national attention and ultimately resulted in a revision in Illinois’ workers' compensation claims that would prevent any State employee hurt at work from being eligible for workers' compensation if the injury happened during a forcible felony, an aggravated DUI, or reckless homicide, if any of those crimes killed or injured another person.
The law is much more restrictive than the initial media summaries blaring “State law bars State employees injured while committing crimes from receiving worker’s comp.”
This is another example of bad cases creating bad law. The Sheriff filed a workers' compensation claim for his injuries but an arbitrator concluded that his high speed and cell phone use was a “substantial and unjustifiable risk resulting in gross deviation” barring his claim. The Illinois legislature reacted to the media and public outcry.
In other states, notably Wisconsin, an advisory council meets annually to deal with such perceived excesses, and to change the law accordingly.
A few years ago I represented a worker who, despite his employer’s offer to re-employ him with his disability, chose instead to obtain vocational rehabilitation, which was ordered by a judge and the Commission. His claim seemed to run afoul of the express purpose of worker’s compensation in Wisconsin and other states, which is to restore the injured worker to a job.
After the case was reported, the employer and insurance carrier representatives on Wisconsin’s Advisory Council recommended (appropriately) this perceived loophole be closed, and the new law barred the employer’s liability for vocational rehabilitation benefits if the employer offered a job to the injured worker which was refused.
Since the early days of workers' compensation in Wisconsin the courts have liberally construed “in the course of employment.” Absent evidence of abandonment of employment, it is presumed employment continues, except if a deviation can be proved.
Poor judgment or negligence is not synonymous with deviation and an employee must willfully abandon job duties to be excluded. If an employee is injured while engaging in an activity and disobedience of an order of the employer solely for the employee’s own benefit, workers' compensation benefits will be denied. However, if the disobedient actions were in furtherance of the employer’s interest rather than the employee’s, compensation is granted.
As one workers' compensation veteran judge has noted, “even bad employees get compensation.” The no-fault nature of workers' compensation sometimes produces hard-to-swallow results.
Thomas M. Domer practices in Milwaukee, Wisconsin (www.domerlaw.com). He has authored and edited several publications including the legal treatise Wisconsin Workers' Compensation Law (West) and he is the Editor of the national publication, Workers' First Watch. Tom is past chair of the Workers' Compensation Section of the American Association for Justice. He is a charter Fellow in the College of Workers' Compensation Lawyers. He co-authors the nationally recognized Wisconsin Workers' Compensation Experts.
Thursday, September 27, 2012
Transportation Injuries Continue to Dominate Workplace Fatalities
Workplace injuries involving transportation continue to be major contributing factors to fatalities in the United States. The US Bureau of Labor Statistics has reported preliminary data for 2011 reflecting that transportation incidents were involved in 41% of fatalities at work.
Click here to read more on this topic from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
More about the fatalities and workplace
Monday, April 18, 2011
OSHA To Fine Employers for Distracted Driving Accidents
The enforcement program was described by Michaels at a symposium on the prevention of Occupationally-Related Distracted Driving conference hosted by Johns Hopkins University. Following the policy announced by President Obama in his Executive Order banning texting while driving, OSHA is calling upon all employers to ban texting while driving.
It is the intention of OSHA to provide education and enforcement on the issue of distracted driving. OSHA will investigate motor vehicle accidents, including cell phone records, and will issue citations and fine employers where an accident involved texting while driving. While OSHA has juridiction over employers, and not employees, it hopes to encourage all employers to declare motor vehicles a "text free zone."
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Hotel Workers Have Work Comp Claims
The National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA) is a partnership program to promote innovative research and improve workplace practices. Unveiled in 1996, NORA is a framework for guiding occupational safety and health research and interventions throughout the nation. NORA stakeholders collaborate to identify critical workplace issues in industry sectors. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) convened a number of these partners to develop the National Services Agenda, which includes safety and health goals for the Accommodations Industry. Groups such as unions, worker organizations, government agencies, and hotel/motel associations can build partnerships to implement these goals and help ensure that hotels are safe for all employees.
Related articles
Thursday, July 7, 2011
Distracted Driving Increases Workers' Compensation Risks
For the complete interview click here.
Friday, April 29, 2011
CDC Urges Employers to Prohibit Cell Phone Use While Driving
"What is already known on this topic?
Highway transportation crashes are the leading cause of occupational fatalities in the United States.
"What is added by this report?
Occupational highway transportation fatality rates declined 2.8% annually during 2003–2008, and groups at greatest risk for occupational highway transportation deaths (e.g., workers aged ≥55 years and truck occupants) differ from those identified for highway transportation deaths in the general motoring public.
"What are the implications for public health practice?
Employers need to know more about the fatality risks to workers from highway transportation crashes, and employer-based strategies (e.g., requiring the use of safety belts in fleet vehicles, restricting cellular telephone use while driving, and allowing for adequate travel time)
This is entirely consistent with findings reported by Jeffrey S. Hickman, Ph.D, of the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute. A driver while texting has a 23.24 times chance of having a motor vehicle accident.
The new initiative by US OSHA to focus on both education and enforcement is a consistent and rational approach to lowering transportation fatalities. OSHA recently announced its intent to fine employers who permit and encourage texting while driving.
Saturday, June 22, 2013
Distracted Walkers Are a Workplace Hazard
Over the last 2 days I watched at least a half-a-dozen people walking in the streets with a cellphone in their hands, and totally ignoring all traffic signals and vehicles around them. We are too quick to blame workers for causing all accidents through the use of cellphones. Pedestrians on many occasions ignore all reason and logic, and walk in front of vehicles oblivious to the world.
Read: Distracted Walking: Injuries Soar for Pedestrians on Phones
Cell Phone Use Not Just Dangerous for Drivers, Study Finds
Read: Distracted Walking: Injuries Soar for Pedestrians on Phones
Cell Phone Use Not Just Dangerous for Drivers, Study Finds
"More than 1,500 pedestrians were estimated to be treated in emergency rooms in 2010 for injuries related to using a cell phone while walking, according to a new nationwide study."
Saturday, August 6, 2011
An Employer Is Responsible To Compensate For Pain
A NJ Appellate Court, in a dramatic reversal of a compensation judge's dismissal of a case, held that "an employer is responsible to compensate" an injured worker for pain. The reviewing court held that, "...the judge misapplied some standards bearing upon this case."
The trial judge's conduct, in baring the treating physician from testifying, was also cited as "a discretionary lapse." The trial judge's ruling was reversed and the case remanded for a hearing.
The case involved a long standing injury that required prolonged treatment for a chronic medical condition. The injury occurred in June of 1989 and was the subject of an Order Approving Settlement in January 2004 for 20% of partial total. That award was entered by another trial judge.
Even thought an Order had been entered by the prior trial judge for continued medical treatment and medication, the insurance company unilaterally terminated provision of those benefits without a court order. The claimant's attorney, George Goceljak, was required to file two motions for continued medical treatment and medication benefits. The trial court dismissed the case for lack of prosecution and then subsequently restored the matter for trial and then marked it "not moved" when a minimal one-cycle (3 week) adjournment was requested. Customarily, NJ workers' compensation cases are tried in piecemeal, every 3 to 6 weeks.
The trial judge then mandated that the trial should begin immediately on January 15, 2010, commenting that she was, "...not going to wait" any longer for the the claimant to proceed with his case. She denied a reconsideration of the application of the injured worker to allow the treating physician to testify, and then proceeded in a 5 month stagnated trial ultimately dismissing the case.
The NJ Appellate Division found, "the judge erred is using, out of its context, the simple thought that 'an employer is not required to compensate and employee for pain,' as a basis for denying this petitioner's application. The larger principle...is that, to the extent that a petitioner experiences continuing pain as a result of his work-connected injury, the employer for whom he worked at the time of the injury remains responsible.'"
Noto v. Staples, Inc., Docket No. A-0237-10T1, 2011 WL 3273921 (NJ App. Div. 2011) Decided August 2, 2010
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Symposium on Prevention of Occupationally-Related Distracted Driving
Monday, April 18, 2011
8:30 AM - 4:00 PM
Kossiakoff Conference Center
11100 Johns Hopkins Road
Laurel, Maryland 20723
1-800-548-3647
8:30 - 9:00 am:
Registration and continental breakfast
9:00 - 9:15 am:
Welcome and Review of the Agenda
Mary Doyle, MPH,RN, COHN-S/CM
Director, ERC Continuing Education Program
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
Meeting Moderator
9:15 - 9:30 am:
Mission of the Symposium and Call to Action
Christine Branche, PhD
Principal Associate Director
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
9:30 - 9:50 am:
U.S. DOT Perspective on Distracted Driving
Peter Appel
Administrator, Research and Innovative Technology Administration
Department of Transportation
9:50 - 10:10 am:
OSHA’s Perspective on Distracted Driving
David Michaels, PhD, MPH
Assistant Secretary of Labor for OSHA
Department of Labor
10:10 - 10:40 am:
What Does the Research Tell Us?
Jeffrey S. Hickman, PhD
Virginia Tech Transportation Institute
Center for Truck and Bus Safety
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
10:40 - 11:00 am:
Audience Q & A/Feedback for morning sessions
11:00 – 11:15 am
Break and Networking
11:15 - 12:00 pm:
Panel Discussion: Elements of Model Programs: Implementation Challenges
Moderator: Jack Hanley
Executive Director
Network of Employers for Traffic Safety
Panelists:
Joseph Van Houten, PhD, CSP
Senior Director, Worldwide EHS
Johnson & Johnson
Tom Bennett
SH&E/OIMS Advisor, Fuels Marketing
Downstream & Chemical SSH&E
Amy Lokken, ARM
Group Director, North American Health & Safety
Coca-Cola Refreshments
David Hopps
Vice President, Risk Management Operations & Environment, Safety & Health
ServiceMaster
12:00 – 12:15 pm:
Audience Discussion and Feedback on Model Programs Panel
12:15 - 1:15 pm:
Lunch (provided on-site)
1:15 - 2:00 pm:
Panel Discussion: In-vehicle Technology to Address Distracted Driving
Moderator: Peter Appel
Administrator, Research and Innovative Technology Administration
Department of Transportation
Panelists:
Eric Collins, JD
Chief Operations Officer
Mobile Posse
Michael Petricone, JD
Senior VP, Government Affairs
Consumer Electronics Association
2:00 - 2:15 pm
Audience Discussion and Feedback on In-Vehicle Technology Panel
2:15 - 3:00 pm:
Panel Discussion: Worker Perspectives
Moderator: James August, MPH
Health and Safety Consultant
Panelists:
LaMont Byrd
Director, Safety and Health Department
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
Rich Duffy
Assistant to the General President for Occupational Health, Safety and Medicine
International Association of Fire Fighters – AFL/CIO
Ed Watt, MS
Director of Health and Safety
Transportation Workers Union of America
3:00 - 3:15 pm
Audience Discussion and Feedback on Workers’ Perspective Panel
3:15 - 3:45 pm:
Facilitated Discussion with Audience
Leslie Nickels, PhD, MEd
Senior Health Communications Fellow
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
3:45 - 4:00 pm:
Closing
Mary Doyle, Meeting Moderator
4:00 - 5:00 pm:
Reception (on site)
Saturday, December 8, 2012
Dedicated Bike Lanes Can Prevent On-The-Job Injuries
Traffic accidents are major factors in the death of workers on the job. A recent report from the American Public Health Association reports that separate cycling lanes will prevent accidents.
Objectives. We compared cycling injury risks of 14 route types and other route infrastructure features.
Methods. We recruited 690 city residents injured while cycling in Toronto or Vancouver, Canada. A case-crossover design compared route infrastructure at each injury site to that of a randomly selected control site from the same trip.
Results. Of 14 route types, cycle tracks had the lowest risk (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 0.11; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.02, 0.54), about one ninth the risk of the reference: major streets with parked cars and no bike infrastructure. Risks on major streets were lower without parked cars (adjusted OR = 0.63; 95% CI = 0.41, 0.96) and with bike lanes (adjusted OR = 0.54; 95% CI = 0.29, 1.01). Local streets also had lower risks (adjusted OR = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.31, 0.84). Other infrastructure characteristics were associated with increased risks: streetcar or train tracks (adjusted OR = 3.0; 95% CI = 1.8, 5.1), downhill grades (adjusted OR = 2.3; 95% CI = 1.7, 3.1), and construction (adjusted OR = 1.9; 95% CI = 1.3, 2.9).
Conclusions. The lower risks on quiet streets and with bike-specific infrastructure along busy streets support the route-design approach used in many northern European countries. Transportation infrastructure with lower bicycling injury risks merits public health support to reduce injuries and promote cycling.
Read More: http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300762?journalCode=ajph&&
Read more about motor vehicle accidents and workers' compensation
Objectives. We compared cycling injury risks of 14 route types and other route infrastructure features.
Methods. We recruited 690 city residents injured while cycling in Toronto or Vancouver, Canada. A case-crossover design compared route infrastructure at each injury site to that of a randomly selected control site from the same trip.
Results. Of 14 route types, cycle tracks had the lowest risk (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 0.11; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.02, 0.54), about one ninth the risk of the reference: major streets with parked cars and no bike infrastructure. Risks on major streets were lower without parked cars (adjusted OR = 0.63; 95% CI = 0.41, 0.96) and with bike lanes (adjusted OR = 0.54; 95% CI = 0.29, 1.01). Local streets also had lower risks (adjusted OR = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.31, 0.84). Other infrastructure characteristics were associated with increased risks: streetcar or train tracks (adjusted OR = 3.0; 95% CI = 1.8, 5.1), downhill grades (adjusted OR = 2.3; 95% CI = 1.7, 3.1), and construction (adjusted OR = 1.9; 95% CI = 1.3, 2.9).
Conclusions. The lower risks on quiet streets and with bike-specific infrastructure along busy streets support the route-design approach used in many northern European countries. Transportation infrastructure with lower bicycling injury risks merits public health support to reduce injuries and promote cycling.
Read More: http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300762?journalCode=ajph&&
Read more about motor vehicle accidents and workers' compensation
Jul 25, 2012
Court Rules Site of Accident Invokes Exclusivity Rule. English: Motor vehicle accident following a ve... A NJ appeals court ruled that a motor vehicle accident cause by a co-worker in the emplyers' parking lot, before work had.
May 23, 2011
In 2009, motor vehicle crashes resulted in approximately 23,000 deaths to passenger vehicle occupants (excluding motorcyclists), and 2.6 million occupants were treated for injuries in emergency departments in the United ...
Nov 29, 2011
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) proposes to restrict the use of hand-held mobile telephones, including hand-held cell phones, by drivers of commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) while operating in ...
Apr 18, 2011
OSHA will investigate motor vehicle accidents, including cell phone records, and will issue citations and fine employers where an accident involved texting while driving. While OSHA has juridiction over employers, and not ...
Friday, July 19, 2013
Privacy: Workers' Compensation Health Data Heading for Electronic Storage
Medical records are a significant aspect of workers' compensation claims and storing them is a significant issue. As claims are filed and litigation is pursed, medical records become critical evidence in evaluation claims and adjudicating decisions.
With the explosion of electronic medical records mandated by The Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act, the secure storage. retrieval and dissemination of medical records has become a challenge. Even though The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1999 (HIPPA) mandates a privacy exclusion for workers' compensation claims, the medical records must remain protected and secure to maintain integretary and avoid unlawful access.
Missing from the equation are regulations from workers' compensation agencies to provide for the security and integrity of the records that have been widely disseminated within the workers' compensation system.
One company has has built a "Bunker" for health records.
With the explosion of electronic medical records mandated by The Patient Protection and Affordable Health Care Act, the secure storage. retrieval and dissemination of medical records has become a challenge. Even though The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1999 (HIPPA) mandates a privacy exclusion for workers' compensation claims, the medical records must remain protected and secure to maintain integretary and avoid unlawful access.Missing from the equation are regulations from workers' compensation agencies to provide for the security and integrity of the records that have been widely disseminated within the workers' compensation system.
One company has has built a "Bunker" for health records.
Saturday, February 15, 2020
The Compensability of a Cellphone Radiation Exposure
A pending case in California may have significant impact on potential workers’ compensation claims throughout the country. The case involves the causal relationship of radio frequency [RF] radiation emitted by cellphones and human cancer. Cohen v. Apple, Inc., et. al, Case 5:19-cv-05322 (Filed 08/23/19) USDCT-North District California - San Jose Division.
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Digital Identification: Is Your Employer Going to Take Your Digital Finger Prints, Iris Scans or Face ID
The technology to digitally capture and store an individual's personal biometric identifiable information is growing at a rapid pace. Employers, medical providers and even government agencies have become frustrated by the outlawed use of Social Security numbers as means of identification.
A simple and easily used application has now become available to collect this data through an iPhone. Balacing workers' privacy against the administration of a workers' compensation system has certainly become even more challending. The use of national and international databases for the collection, dissemination and use of this type of data publically, strikes fear in the hearts of injured workers and they become even more reluctant to report both saftey concerns and injuries to employers for fear of discrimination and retaliation.
"The California-based company AOptix rolled out a new hardware and app package that transforms an iPhone into a mobile biometric reader. As first reported by Danger Room in February, AOptix is the recipient of a $3 million research contract from the Pentagon for its on-the-go biometrics technology."
Read he Complete Article:: Now Your iPhone Can Read Fingerprints, Scan Irises and ID Your Face (Wired)
"The California-based company AOptix rolled out a new hardware and app package that transforms an iPhone into a mobile biometric reader. As first reported by Danger Room in February, AOptix is the recipient of a $3 million research contract from the Pentagon for its on-the-go biometrics technology."
Read he Complete Article:: Now Your iPhone Can Read Fingerprints, Scan Irises and ID Your Face (Wired)
Monday, August 1, 2011
Workers Compensation Named to Top 50 Human Resources Blogs 2011
Evan Carmichael of The Entrepreneur Blog has named Workers Compensation Blog to the Top 50 Human Resources Blogs of 2011. Workers Compensation Blog is a resource for trends and developments in workers' compensation. It's popularity has grown exponentially over the last few years. The site contains hundreds of resource articles and links. It has received hundreds of thousands of hits and page views.
"Anyone who has ever run a business knows one thing – the most important resource you have at your disposal are the people around you. That is why getting your human resources strategy right is so crucial to business success. The following Top 50 Human Resources Blogs of 2011 can help you do just that.
"Written by the industry’s best, these blogs can help you with everything from hiring, to firing, to becoming a strong leader and managing your people in the best way possible. To reach the top, you need to have a solid team supporting you.
Friday, August 30, 2013
Texting a Message to A Driver Imposes Liability for an Accident
In an unanimous decision a NJ Appellate Court held a texter potentially liable for causing a motor vehicle accident:
"The issue before us is not directly addressed by these
statutes or any case law that has been brought to our attention.
"We must determine as a matter of civil common law whether one
who is texting from a location remote from the driver of a motor
vehicle can be liable to persons injured because the driver was
distracted by the text. We hold that the sender of a text
message can potentially be liable if an accident is caused by
texting, but only if the sender knew or had special reason to
know that the recipient would view the text while driving and
thus be distracted.
"In this appeal, we must also decide whether plaintiffs have
shown sufficient evidence to defeat summary judgment in favor of
the remote texter. We conclude they have not. We affirm the
trial court's order dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against the
sender of the text messages, but we do not adopt the trial
court's reasoning that a remote texter does not have a legal
duty to avoid sending text messages to one who is driving.
"We conclude that a person sending text messages has a
duty not to text someone who is driving if the texter knows, or
has special reason to know, the recipient will view the text
while driving. But we also conclude that plaintiffs have not
presented sufficient evidence to prove that Colonna had such
knowledge when she texted Best immediately before the accident.
LINDA KUBERT AND DAVID
KUBERT,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
KYLE BEST, SUSAN R. BEST,
EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF
NICKOLAS J. BEST, DECEASED,
Defendants,
and
SHANNON COLONNA,
Defendant-Respondent.
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
APPELLATE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. A-1128-12T4
August 27, 2013
Read more about "texting" and workers' compensation:
"The issue before us is not directly addressed by these
statutes or any case law that has been brought to our attention.
"We must determine as a matter of civil common law whether one
who is texting from a location remote from the driver of a motor
vehicle can be liable to persons injured because the driver was
distracted by the text. We hold that the sender of a text
message can potentially be liable if an accident is caused by
texting, but only if the sender knew or had special reason to
know that the recipient would view the text while driving and
thus be distracted.
"In this appeal, we must also decide whether plaintiffs have
shown sufficient evidence to defeat summary judgment in favor of
the remote texter. We conclude they have not. We affirm the
trial court's order dismissing plaintiffs' complaint against the
sender of the text messages, but we do not adopt the trial
court's reasoning that a remote texter does not have a legal
duty to avoid sending text messages to one who is driving.
"We conclude that a person sending text messages has a
duty not to text someone who is driving if the texter knows, or
has special reason to know, the recipient will view the text
while driving. But we also conclude that plaintiffs have not
presented sufficient evidence to prove that Colonna had such
knowledge when she texted Best immediately before the accident.
LINDA KUBERT AND DAVID
KUBERT,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
KYLE BEST, SUSAN R. BEST,
EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF
NICKOLAS J. BEST, DECEASED,
Defendants,
and
SHANNON COLONNA,
Defendant-Respondent.
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
APPELLATE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. A-1128-12T4
August 27, 2013
….
Jon L. Gelman of Wayne NJ is the author NJ Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thompson) and co-author of the national treatise, Modern Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thompson). For over 4 decades the Law Offices of Jon L Gelman 1.973.696.7900 jon@gelmans.com have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered occupational accidents and illnesses.
Read more about "texting" and workers' compensation:
Jul 31, 2009
New technology encroaching upon the workplace has been both a help and a hindrance. Recent studies add to the growing volumes of data reporting that the use of cell phones while driving provides a significant distraction ...
Feb 11, 2011
A workers compensation claim filed by a state trooper for injuries he sustained while texting and speeding 126 miles per hour that resulting in a fatal accident with oncoming teenagers, a driver and a passenger, has drawn ...
Apr 29, 2011
CDC urged employers to prohibit texting while driving. A safety initiative by employers will go along way to reducing workers' compensation costs. "What is already known on this topic? Highway transportation crashes are the ...
Apr 18, 2011
Following the policy announced by President Obama in his Executive Order banning texting while driving, OSHA is calling upon all employers to ban texting while driving. It is the intention of OSHA to provide education and ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)