MichieHamlett Attorneys at Law

1. MichieHamlett Attorneys at Law J. Gregory Webb, Attorney Liability of Corporations – Corporate Cell Phone Policies & Emerging Technologies September 19, 2013

2. I AM TALKING TO YOU FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF A PLAINTIFF’S ATTORNEY. WHAT WOULD I LOOK AT IF I WERE TAKING A CASE FOR A FAMILY DESTROYED BY A DISTRACTED DRIVER?

3. I AM NOT TALKING TO YOU AS A DEFENSE ATTORNEY OR AN ATTORNEY ADVISING YOU OF YOUR CORPORATE POLICIES. I STRONGLY URGE YOU TO CONTACT YOUR OWN COUNSEL FOR LEGAL ADVICE.

4. Growing epidemic with the ubiquitous use of hand-held devices such as: Cell phones • Smart phones GPS devices • iPads and Tablets mini-Tablets • iPods and MP3 players Technology in cars

5. Combined with other distractions that have been around since our parents’ and grandparents’ times: Eating • Drinking Music (radios, CD players, etc.)

6. As a trial attorney (plaintiff’s lawyer), I am addressing you as to why it is imperative that you have a practice and culture in place, along with a policy if you are going to have one, that BANS cell phone and smart phone use.

7. Reason #1: Influence/Change behavior & practices Reason #2: Aid in preventing liability issues Reason #3: Aid in reducing premiums Reason #4: Public relations Ultimate Reason: to save lives

8. VIRGINIA law. Respondeat Superior (Master-Servant) Ultimately, every employer is likely responsible for the negligent acts of its employees who are operating within the course and scope of their employment at the time of the incident. Not liable if act occurs during a “frolic and detour” during work. Your company, regardless of policies and training, will likely be liable if an employee is negligent while on company time. (Vicarious liability).

9. It is VERY hard to get to an employer directly, in Virginia, for direct liability.

10. The GOALS might be to: • Educate, train and prevent employees from causing injury or death from DD (CULTURE & PRACTICE) • It is GOOD BUSINESS • Promote safety for public relations purposes • It is GOOD BUSINESS

11. Would you send your employee out on a work-related mission if she had been drinking? Or using drugs? Or was doing either of those while driving? • NO. DWD is no different than DUI. (.08 BAC, even hands-free) • 2. Would you allow the use of drugs or alcohol to be discretionary during work? NO.

12. 3. Why then would you not have the same ZERO TOLERANCE for cell phone or hand-held device use while operating a vehicle? 4. Why would you allow, or even direct, the use of cell phones or hand-held devices while operating a vehicle? This could lead to direct liability of an employer.

13. 5. Why would you not have ZERO TOLERANCE?

14. What are the potential consequences for you or your company if you do not have a good policy and practice in place, banning DWD?

15. Another potential path to a finding of liability for an injured person(s) via potential direct liability of your company (versus respondeat superior) - - - MAKES FOR VERY DAMAGING EVIDENCE AGAINST A COMPANY/EMPLOYER.

16. 2. A “VERDICT DRIVER” – increasing a verdict’s amount because of egregious conduct and a willful disregard of a known hazard - - - (Gross Negligence or Willful and Wanton?)

17. 3. Potential punitive damages for willful and wanton conduct (limited to $350,000 in Virginia). Willful and wanton conduct = conscious disregard of another’s rights, or with reckless indifference to consequences with the defendant aware that his conduct would probably cause injury.

18. How will I find out whether there was usage of a hand-held device: smart phone, cell phone, etc.? Litigation Discovery – subpoena cell phone records (texting shows up on some), cell phone towers, internet service provider documents Depositions – of the driver, occupants, and corporate managers, supervisors and even corporate officers and owners

19. Why is all of this important to you, as a business (notwithstanding the danger to citizens)? • Do you have enough insurance? • Does it cover punitive damages? • Will your insurance cover you or your company if you were required to have a DD policy, and training, and did not do it? • If not enough, then what happens? (Can your company withstand a multi-million dollar hit?)

20. What makes business sense? Have ZERO TOLERANCE for Distracted Driving.

21. If not, I have you and your business painted into a corner, where when I ask you this question: “Why did you not have a ZERO TOLERANCE practice banning cell phone usage while operating your company trucks?” I don’t care what your answer is, because I have you either way (the best kinds of questions).

22. Because you are admitting one of the following: • You knew better, but didn’t care enough to change • You admit you did not recognize the risk and hazard, which flies in the face of all of the publicity and knowledge out there in the world now (and you look uninformed and negligent) • So I ask the jury to educate you.

23. Virginia Code § 46.2-341.20:5(A) reads: No person driving a commercial motor vehicle shall text while driving such a vehicle. A driver who violates this policy is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $2,750.

24. E.g. of possible employer direct liability  - all employers are likely to be liable because of respondeat superior (master-servant) law: If a supervisor requires the employee to follow text or email updates while driving and/or to respond to them while driving, knowing the employee is behind the wheel.

25. Virginia Code § 46.2-1078.1. reads: Use of handheld personal communications devices in certain motor vehicles; exceptions; penalty. Effective: July 1, 2013

26. It is unlawful for any person to operate a moving motor vehicle on the highways in the Commonwealth while using any handhand personal communications to:

27. 1. Manually enter multiple letters or text in the device as a means of communicating with another person; or

28. 2. Read any email or text message transmitted to the device or stored within the device, provided that this prohibition shall not apply to any name or number stored within the device nor to any caller identification information.

29. B. The provisions of this section shall not apply to: 1. The operator of any emergency vehicle while he is engaged in the performance of his official duties;

30. An operator who is lawfully parked or stopped; • The use of factory- installed or aftermarket global positioning systems (GPS) or wireless communications devices to transmit or receive data as part • of a digital dispatch system; or

31. 4. Any person using a handheld personal communications device to report an emergency.

32. C. A violation of this section is a traffic infraction punishable, for a first offense, by a fine of $125 and, for a second or subsequent offense, by a fine of $250.

33. Stay Informed. Educate Others. Do YOUR part to help End Distracted Driving. Charlottesville, Virginia