Cell Phone Ban Reduces Traffic Accidents and Deaths

Traffic accidents and traffic related deaths decreased significantly in California since the cell phone ban went into effect. Additinally, the California Department of Motor Vehicles or DMV (www.dmv.ca.gov) said that last year there were 460,487 cell phone tickets convictions. DMV said this number was up over 150,000 from the previous year.

If you or someone you know has been injured in a traffic accident where the other driver was using their cell phone in violation of the law, this is called negligence per se. What this means is that when someone is not acting in a safe manner and they are also breaking the law by their conduct, they are presumed to be "negligent" under the law.

The concept of negligence per se is very helpful in an injury case. Where the negligent party is breaking the law, it is very difficult for such a person to defend their position that they did not cause an injury to the other side. Further, when there is a violation of the law, it almost always helps to increase the monetary value of an injury case. A great example of this is where someone causes an accident and is arrested for driving under the influence or DUI (See www.4criminaldefense.com ). When the other party in an accident is arrested for a DUI charge or they may even be subject to punitive damages against them. This means that in addition to paying out money for one's pain and suffering they may have to pay for additional damages as "punishment" for there wrongful conduct.

If you have been injured in a traffic accident where someone broke the law by talking on the phone or speeding or DUI, please contact me to discuss your rights: www.shermanoaksinjurylawfirm.com or call me:

(818) 783-5700 or (888) 764-4340 or email me at: vallenslaw@yahoo.com

Internet Marketing Experts The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.