New research finds that hands-free cellphone laws are associated with fewer driver deaths, and laws in 21 states allowing only hands-free cell phone use by drivers have prevented about 140 driver deaths and 13,900 driver injuries annually in the U.S. since 2004. The study appears in the current issue of Accident Analysis and Prevention, a publication of the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators.

The study analyzed death and injury records in the period 2004-2013, and concluded that 21 states have passed hands-free cell phone laws (HAZL), and “these laws can account for a large part of the decline in fatality rates and injury rates for passenger cars.”

The researchers caution that they could not determine why cell phone use is associated with fewer car accidents. “But it is likely that having the ability to make or receive calls while driving can be distracting and impair driving,” they write.

The researchers also note that “although the rate of fatalities has declined overall, it has remained relatively stable for those ages 16-19. The increase is observed among drivers 50 and older.”

A recent study published by the Journal of Emergency Medical Services found that giving first aid instructions by cell phone is associated with emergency care providers using ineffective treatments.

Cell phone use and its relationship to car accidents have been extensively researched. The relationship between cell phone use and car accidents is an interesting subject and the findings may be skewed, especially when relying on data from just a few states. Nevertheless, the data is significant and raises questions about what can be done to limit car accident injuries.

The study concluded that “the overall rate of motor vehicle collisions is relatively stable” and that the data “shows no consistent patterns with regard to cell phone use among drivers. However, the data does show that: ” * Driving speed is unrelated to cellphone use. * There is a trend for drivers who are talking to be speaking longer. * Motorists talking on their cell phones are more likely to be talking on their cell phones when involved in an accident. * In an accident, the likelihood of a person talking on their cell phone increases as they are injured. The report provides one theory as to why there is an increase in cell phone use and an even higher rise in injuries. It was theorized that “the long duration of cell phone use is actually contributing to people`s injury, thus causing them to talk more on their cell phones when they are involved in a collision.”

With the rise in injuries from cell phone use comes a rise in lawsuits. A suit may be filed by an injured party who was injured by another party`s negligence. An injured party may be a passenger, a pedestrian or even an operator. Injured parties may sue for pain and suffering or for punitive damages. If a plaintiff sues, the suit should be filed within one year of the accident. If an injured person files a claim, he should submit proof of the injuries he has suffered in the suit. If one decides to sue a motorist, they should have proof of insurance and proof of name and address. If the defendant sues, they may submit a bond or surety. The surety or bond will be issued by the court and will be used for payment of any judgement. If the injured party decides to take the negligent party to court, a judge will issue the summons and a summons must be delivered to the negligent party.

Injuries are not only the result of a motorist using their cell phone. A driver may swerve into a cyclist, and either fail to see the cyclist or hit the cyclist as a result of his or her distraction. The report suggested that if the driver is at fault, they have a duty of care to the cyclist to see to it that he or she is not injured. It also suggested that if the cyclist is at fault, they have a duty of care to others to avoid causing injury to other drivers.

A personal injury firm in Dallas noted, “If an injury happens because of a cyclist being distracted by his or her cell phone, then one may file a claim against the person who was negligent. However, it is suggested that for an injured cyclist to seek a case against a driver, the cyclist needs to have enough evidence to show the driver acted unreasonably and that the driver`s negligence caused the cyclist`s injury. If a person has enough evidence to support a claim, the person should then obtain a lawyer who will have to investigate into what laws have been broken and to make sure they have been fully complied with to have an even stronger case.”

It is important to get the advice of a lawyer who is an expert in personal injury law. After all, this is the area of law which has seen the most increase in litigations and that is one reason why it is advisable to hire a lawyer who is also an expert in this area of law.

To begin a personal injury claim, the lawyer will ask the client whether they are going to make the claim on their own or take the case to the attorney. They will talk about the case, and the idea is for the attorney to discuss the case, and to give the professional opinion on whether or not the case is worth pursuing. If the attorney feels that it is, then he will do his own investigation into the case, and then provide the client with a report. However, if the attorney is convinced that there is no case, then he will say that so, then the client may be advised to just forget about it, and to forget about it, the client will also be advised to seek for an attorney who will tell them their options, and can help them in this matter.

Now that the case is not going to be pursued by the attorney, the client can then ask the lawyer to negotiate with the other side in the case. The lawyer will be able to help you make the choice as to whether you are going to opt for a settlement or go for trial. It is always wise to opt for a settlement since the other side will be aware that you have no means to fight back, and that you are going to give them your best. Therefore, the lawyers in such cases always opt for a settlement since this will be what the other side will try to accept, since it is what they have to lose. Since you have no means to fighting back, and that you are going to give them your best, the attorneys usually opt for a settlement because in this way they can use the time to build the case. It is much better that the time spent in building the case should be kept, than to waste it in a trial.

If the case is going to go to trial, then the client will be advised to make sure that they have a expert lawyer who is going to fight the case for them. If you opt for a settlement, then the attorney will be able to give you some advice on what you should ask the expert lawyer, and why. Such experts are then going to be able to make a statement about your case to the judge and jury during the trial. They are going to be able to convince the judge and jury that you deserve the compensation, and that the other side is actually responsible for the accident.

There are many reasons why one should opt for a settlement instead of going for a trial. If you have lost your case in court, then the lawyer is also going to take out the costs and fees of the claim. And then you will have to pay this even if you lose your case. On the other hand, if you have won the case, then you will not have to pay for the expert lawyer, and even the costs and fees of the claim will be covered by the other side.

– Contributed by