is this a serious question?

You can get sued for anything....it doesn't mean they'll win.

Not only should the answer be "no" but any judge who would allow such a case to go to trial should be removed. No only doesn't it make sense, no one should have to spend a penny (while they are still made) to defend themselves either. However, I could see suing the manufacturer of the texting device. They could be compelled to install a "chip" that would disable the unit if it moved at a certain predetermined speed. I realize it would also affect the passengers but the safety factor would outweigh the inconvenience. It does reek of "nanny state" mentality but does make more sense than some the dumb ideas from Trenton and Washington. Yes, I admit that seeing drivers calling and texting on the road irks me to no end.

Yes, you can be sued for anything and they might not win but that doesn't mean you wont be inconvenienced and be out fees for a lawyer when you are innocent. It is a no lose situation for a lawyer to try to bring as many defendants into a case as possible because they might find a sympathetic jury. The law system in this country is ridiculous.

Absolutley not! How about blaming the company who made texting possible? Seriously. Recieving a text while driving doesn't cause accidents, making the decision to read or respond to one, does. Therefore if there's an accident, the blame has to fall on the driver who ultimately chose to use his phone, and no one else. **One of the worst technologies ever created simply because people will never learn to stop texting while driving!**

The biggest problem in New JUSEY. judges are APPOINTED??NOT elected.like in most NON CORRUPT STATES. If a JUDGE is an A--ole then he or she should be removed, If the judge were to be elected WE could remove them. Not in NJ life time of ?? decisions!! You are a GOOD JUDGE!!!??? HA!HA!

Your government is your Daddy. Get used to it sheep.

The legal system in this country is a joke. Serious tort reform is needed fast.

This is like suing Solo (maker of the Red Solo Cup) for your DUI or suing your spoon for making you fat.

The choice to read and reply to a text (or anything else not involved with driving) is choice by the driver. It is his or her decision and responsibility alone. What next, graduated licenses for operating a cell phone?

Just because your phone rings or you get a text it doesn't mean you have to look at it right then and there. I'm tired of stupid people using 'smart' phones every waking minute of their lives. At a staff meeting - right in the middle of talkiing - my boss will actually stop talking to look at incoming text messages. It's just gotten too stupid. I almost ran over a women in the brick plaza parking lot because she just walked in front of my car, she was too busy texting and didn't even look up when I locked up my brakes. I wish I could say it was some dumb kid but she had to be in her forties.

ABSOLUTELY YES! These comments alone are one of the reasons that there are crashes caused by texting while driving. Are you kidding me? "Sue the company that created texting" That's a good one.

First off, it's against the law to USE your cell phone while driving in NJ. So you shouldn't be using it in the first place. It boggles my mind as to why you people feel you are so important that you have to read a text as soon as you get it. You are pathetic. These people made the wrong choice, now they should pay for it.

I agree with grill master it's the drivers fault if he picks up the phone while driving
I see so many people texting and talking on the phone including the police put the phone down and drive

It is obvious from the comments and the poll that the majority of commenters reserve the right to text (and phone) no matter what the consequences. It is equally obvious that the injured deserve the right to sue all responsible: caller, callee and manufacturer.

The number of drivers of all ages, from older to the youngest
are still using their Cell phones while driving ...
I have almost been hit head-on by a young driver while she was
on her Cell phone ... while doing this, she had drifted into my lane.
GSP commuter hours are always populated by drivers who attempt
to bury their cell phones against their head ... even looking away from
the direction they are traveling ... sad when this happens and a
serious injury or death occurs ... ALL THE LAWS AND SUITS WILL NEVER
STOP THOSE WHO CONTINUE TO USE THE TEXT & CELL TECHNOLOGY.
MY funniest are the young ladies doing their makeup while holding onto
the steering wheel ... talk about multi-tasking???

I cannot believe we are even having a discussion on this topic! You are to always be in control of not only your vehicle, but it is entirely up to you as to when you answer or read a text. Are you serious!!!!?!?!?!?!?!?!

I would have structured the poll question differently:
A- State your age: [ ] 17 to [ ] 25
B- Do you use your Cell phone while driving? [ ] yes [ ] no.
C- Do you text while driving? [ ] yes [ ] no.
D- Do you originate the calls [ ] yes [ ] no.
E- Do you answer your Cell phone while driving? [ ] yes [ ] no.

I say it depends if the second party knows that they are driving and continues to txt back and forth then they are just as guilty as the driver

It is equally obvious that the injured deserve the right to sue all responsible: caller, callee and manufacturer. ?? EyeOpener??
GTFO

Okay the person Driving is the ONLY one responsible , how the F does the texter technically know he was driving anyway??? That could of been left out. And the company that manufactures the phone COME ON REALLY??? Whatever that person does with the phone once they purchase the damn thing is up to them. Companies are making ways to do things with the phones now a days to avoid accidents. Only one to blame is the one behind the wheel using the phone.. Oh well people sue others for very petty things because they're greedy a holes . What are you gonna do, that's life.

Interesting Cell-Text Phone Concept ...
the design should allow for ALL PHONES TO BECOME INACTIVE
WHEN AN AUTOMOBILE-TRUCK OR ANY DRIVEN VEHICLE
IS RUNNING ... AN INTERFERENCE ELEMENT SHOULD DO THE
TRICK ...
HOW IS IT I WITNESS HUNDREDS OF CELL PHONE USERS ON
THE GSP AND SOUTHERN OCEAN ROADS EVERY WEEK ...
RECORDS SHOW LOW TICKET RATES ... LOCAL POLICE OFFICIALS
SHOULD GET PATCH THAT DATA ... AND WITH THE FINES INCREASING
PERHAPS THE MESSAGE WILL GET THROUGH???

So can I sue the local radio station for causing my speeding ticket because they played "Radar Love"? If a car full of kids hears "Bohemian Rhapsody" and recreates the scene from Wayne's World, can they sue the DJ after their accident?

Of course not. Drivers are ultimately responsible for their choices behind the wheel, whether it be speeding or not paying attention to the road because of music or phones or others in the car. As many here have stated, if the text or conversaton is that important pull over.

^^ haha nice!

Looks like the judge got it right

http://www.courierpostonline.com/article/20120525/BUSINESS/205250332/N-J-judge-Texter-not-liable-driver-s-crash?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

Lets wait and see what the judge decides before drawing an opinion on the judge. That said, some areas of judiciary are well known for outragious decisions. Family court is a prime example.

I misseb berry's post. Good to see that common sense has prevailed.

Exactly - there is no way to know when someone will read your text. It might be the same to ask a radio station to be included in a lawsuit of a car crash because the song they were playing at the time of the crash was too up-beat!

Plain and simple - font freaking text and drive!!!

Glad to see the judge ruled that the sender could not be included it the law suit.
It should be the driver who answered the call/text.
There is no law that says if a phone is ringing you MUST answer it.
I doubt you could sue the caller if you tripped and injured yourself answer your house phone.

The question now becomes- will the plaintiffs appeal?

There are several things at issue here. I believe that the most egregious injustice is that Shannon Colonna is being sued for originating the texts. By that standard, the inventor of texting, the cell phone carrier company, the manufacturer of the phone and the FCC who licenses the phones and the airwave frequencies should also be sued for their connection to texting. The point is, to paraphrase our friends who advocate for unrestricted Second Amendment rights, that cell phones don't crash, drivers do. But nevertheless, even though the judge dismissed the charge, Colonna is required to retain and pay for a lawyer to defend her. What should really happen is that if a person brings a frivilous suit such as this, and loses, they should be required to pay the defense attorney's fees and for any lost wages and inconvenience on the part of the defendant. That would curb a lot of this silliness. And while I support motorcyclist's rights to the road, My experience on the road is that the vast majority of them recklessly speed, take chances and have perfected the art of careless driving and 2. If you go onto a highway and travel at high speed on a machine that, in case of an accident, will make you a flying human projectile, I question your prudence. Please don't be offended; everyone I know who rode motorcycles was unfortunately either injured or was killed.

‎....based on this judge's decision......this will kill any chances of me filing a lawsuit should I receive a piece of mail from the DMV....attempt to read it while walking down some stairs while holding hot coffee, juggling chainsaws, and putting in my contact lenses...then... fall and end up scalded, armless, and blind. This common sense and personal responsibility stuff is just too much to deal with. How WILL a lawyer make ends meet?

Just don't answer ur phone unless its an emergency