For many, younger motorists are believed to be the generation of drivers most likely to have their noses buried in their cellphones while driving. In fact, here in Missouri, texting while driving is currently only prohibited for drivers aged 21-years-old or younger.

However, a recent survey conducted by AT&T directly challenges these preconceived notions as it indicates that teenagers may be getting a bad rap for being the worst at texting while driving. In particular, the survey discovered that adults may actually be more likely than their younger counterparts to be sending texts while behind the wheel.

AT&T texting survey

Interestingly, the recent survey discovered that 49 percent of adult respondents admit to texting while driving – compared to only 43 percent of teen drivers. Even more frightening is the fact that a whopping 98 percent of adult survey respondents acknowledged that texting or emailing while driving is unsafe – although almost half continue to do it.

However, the results of the survey did indicate that texting while driving may be a recent phenomenon among adults. For instance, 60 percent of adult respondents claimed they never texted while driving a mere three years ago – meaning the texting-while-driving epidemic is getting worse despite public awareness that it is extremely dangerous.

Based on these results, it may be time for many states to revisit their texting-while-driving prohibitions, or in the case of Missouri, expand them since they currently only apply to younger drivers.

Missouri texting-while-driving law

Specifically, the Missouri texting-while-driving ban expressly states that no person aged 21 or below may use a hand-held electronic wireless communications device – such as a cellphone, blackberry or other portable electronic device – to write, read or send a text message while operating a vehicle in Missouri. However, the does not apply if:

• The driver is operating an authorized emergency vehicle
• The driver is reporting illegal activity
• The driver is requesting medical assistance or preventing an injury
• The driver is using a communications device that is “permanently embedded” into the vehicle

Unfortunately, while it is still technically legal for Missouri motorists over the age of 21 to text while driving, that does not mean these drivers cannot be distracted by their phones just as easily as younger drivers. Both young and old drivers need to be held accountable if their texting habits result in car accidents

If you or a loved one has been injured by a texting driver, it is often important to contact a knowledgeable distracted driving accident attorney to be advised of your options given your circumstances. An experienced attorney can assist in gathering important evidence and help ensure your rights are protected.

Earlier this month, a federal appeals court in Washington D.C. upheld – with one small exception – the new hours-of-service (HOS) regulations that govern truck drivers and how long they are permitted to drive without taking a break. This particular decision concludes the most recent chapter of the on-going feud between federal regulators and trucking companies regarding the controversial HOS rules.

New federal HOS regulations

The HOS rules in dispute were first announced the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) over 18 months ago and went into effect on July 1 of this year. Specifically, the new HOS regulations added several safety-enhancing limitations to trucking hours, including:

• Maximum Work Week. The rule limits the maximum average workweek to 70 hours for truck drivers.
• 34-hour Restart. The rule permits drivers who reach their 70-hour weekly limit to start driving again so long as they rest for 34 consecutive hours, which must include at least two blocks of time from 1:00 a.m. to 5:00 a.m.
• 30-Minute Break. The rule prohibits truckers from driving longer than 8 hours unless they take at least a 30-minute break.

In particular, these rule changes were designed to fight truck driver fatigue, which is extremely important in states that experience a large number of trucking accidents due to their busy transportation hubs, such as Missouri. In fact, according to numbers reported by the Missouri State Highway patrol, a person was killed or injured every 2.4 hours in a commercial vehicle accident on Missouri roadways in 2011 – indicating much can still be done to improve trucking safety.

Thankfully, the FMCSA estimates that the new HOS regulations will prevent roughly 1,400 trucking accidents and 560 injuries every year in the U.S. – not to mention they will save 19 lives each year as well.

Sadly, not everyone believes these new rules will actually improve highway safety as those in the trucking industry initially met them with skepticism. For instance, during the litigation recently before the federal appellate court in Washington, the American Trucking Associations argued that the new rules would simply add to the industry’s costs without improving safety. The group further maintained that the additional/longer break periods would reduce productivity by 3 percent, thus costing the industry $18 billion annually.

However, this reasoning did not convince the court. Ultimately, the court’s decision upheld the rule changes stating that these “highly technical points” were best left up to the FMCSA’s discretion. The only exception to this decision was that the court vacated the 30-minute break rule as it applied to short-haul drivers.

Fortunately, rule changes such as these are being made to improve traffic safety. However, no matter how many rules are created, trucking accidents caused by careless drivers will likely continue to occur. If you or a loved one has been injured in a trucking accident, it is often best to seek the counsel of an experienced trucking accident injury attorney. A skilled attorney can review the facts of your case and outline what your rights and options may be given your circumstances.

According to the Missouri State Highway Patrol (MSHP), there were 208 deaths on Missouri roadways attributed to drunk driving in 2011 – with another 3,625 people injured. Sadly, MSHP indicates these numbers may actually be larger as there is significant evidence that officers under-report alcohol involvement when investigating these Missouri drunk driving accidents.

Even more upsetting is the fact that many of these accidents could have been easily avoided had the intoxicated motorists simply elected not to get behind the wheel after drinking – although, importantly, the blame doesn’t always end there under Missouri law. In fact, bars, restaurants or taverns may share the blame, and potential liability, if they over-serve a patron and that patron subsequently injures another while driving. This form of liability is known Dram Shop liability in Missouri.

Missouri’s Dram Shop law

When it comes to Dram Shop liability in Missouri, lawmakers have codified English common law into statute, which essentially presumes that providing alcohol to customers cannot be considered the proximate cause of injuries cause by intoxicated bar patrons.

However, there are two significant exceptions to this rule which state that anyone licensed to sell alcohol – such as bars or taverns – can be held liable for injuries to third parties by intoxicated patrons if “clear and convincing” evidence shows that:

• The establishment knowingly sold alcohol to the patron after the patron was already visibly intoxicated; or
• The establishment sold alcohol to the patron when it knew, or should have known, the patron was under 21-years old.

In many cases, the question of what is considered “visibly intoxicated” is paramount. Under the Missouri statute, a person is deemed “visibly intoxicated” when he or she is intoxicated to the point in which “impairment is shown by significantly uncoordinated physical action or significant physical dysfunction.”

Nevertheless, things can get a bit tricky when determining if a patron is visibly intoxicated. For instance, it is quite possible that a bar patron with a blood-alcohol content (BAC) of 0.09 percent may not show any physical manifestations of being intoxicated despite being over the legal limit for drunk driving. In fact, Missouri law expressly states that a person’s BAC does not constitute evidence, by itself, that a person is visibly intoxicated for Dram Shop purposes.

Consequently, Dram Shop cases often concentrate on the details specific to that particular situation when determining if any outward manifestations exist to show that a bar patron was visibly intoxicated. This is why it is often best to seek the counsel of an attorney experienced in Dram Shop litigation if injured in a drunk driving accident. A skilled and knowledgeable attorney will not only be aware of relevant laws, but will also know what facts to look for when developing a case.

In most states, including Missouri, drivers must purchase an auto insurance policy that provides a minimum amount of bodily injury coverage.

For instance, Missouri drivers must buy a policy that covers at least $25,000 per person for bodily injuries sustained in a car accident, among other minimum requirements. However, with healthcare costs today, a measly $25k would cover just a couple of days in the hospital. Many other states also have similar bare-bones policy mandates.

However, some drivers choose to carry only this minimum $25k auto insurance coverage to save money on premiums. Or, according to Alex Hageli, director of auto-insurance policy for the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America, many drivers skirt these laws and refrain from purchasing any auto insurance at all in the hopes that they won’t get caught.

So why is this problematic?

Why proper insurance is essential

If a driver is hit by another driver who is not insured or isn’t properly insured, the injured driver is not covered.

A case in point was recently highlighted in the Wall Street Journal. After running a stop sign, a driver in Oklahoma crashed into a couple’s Jeep. The couple sustained serious injuries and were both hospitalized. The total medical bills reached $550,000. But the couple found out that the at-fault driver didn’t carry any auto insurance to cover their expenses.

Due to this potential scenario, many drivers chose to purchase what’s known as uninsured / underinsured protection on their own policies. In the event drivers are in an auto accident with a driver who has limited or no auto insurance, this protection kicks in and they are covered.

Targeting the problem in Missouri

Officials realize that drivers operating vehicles without insurance is a problem. According to the Insurance Research Council, approximately 14 percent of drivers on the roadways today drive without auto insurance. It seems the traditional fine simply isn’t enough of a deterrent to force people to procure adequate insurance coverage.

But there is hope for stricter regulation. Nationwide proactive measures are continuously being done. In fact, this past September, authorities in the state of Missouri along with 10 other states adopted a “no pay, no play” law that stipulates uninsured drivers injured by at-fault drivers can’t sue for pain and suffering as a penalty for refusing to acquire auto insurance.

The Insurance Research Council estimates that the program could reduce the number of uninsured motorists by about 1.6 percent-albeit a conservative estimate but still significant.

Other states are utilizing programs that take away license plates from vehicles that are found uninsured.

It remains to be seen whether the “no pay, no play” law will have any real impact on forcing drivers to abide by the law. For now, drivers are encouraged to purchase their own uninsured / underinsured coverage in the event of an accident.