We all know texting while driving is a terrible idea, and in recent years, states have been seriously cracking down drivers caught doing so.  New Jersey, in particular, has been strict, upping the penalties to be almost on par with a DUI’s—but the state hasn’t stopped there.  Because of a recent ruling in the New Jersey courts, there may be a whole new precedent of driving and texting violations—one that penalizes individual who texts the driver.

The Court’s ruling came about from a lawsuit stemming back a few years.  In short, in 2009, a young driver—only 18 at the time—was texting back and forth with his girlfriend while driving.  Distracted, the driver started veering off his lane, into another, opposing lane of traffic.  Unfortunately, at the same time, a motorcyclist and his wife happened to be cruising down that lane.

The ensuing accident was—sparing the details—horrific.  In addition to filing suit against the driver, the motorcyclist and his wife also sued the driver’s girlfriend—the texter.  She had, they stated, distracted the driver and was consequently partially responsible for the accident.  The victims’ attorney argued that texting a driver was equivalent to willfully distracting that driver in person, as if sitting in the passenger seat.

The Court ultimately ruled: “We hold that the sender of a text message can potentially be liable if an accident is caused by texting, but only if the sender knew or had special reason to know that the recipient would view the text while driving and thus be distracted.”

The Court did not, however, find the driver’s girlfriend liable for the accident as it found that she did not know her boyfriend was driving at the time.  The distinction here is crucial: one can only be found liable if he or she consciously knew the driver was not only driving, but would be distracted by the text.

This decision brings up an interesting question though—how can something like this be proved?  And how can anyone know whether the driver would be distracted by the text?  Will this eventually lead to a rash of fines?  While the ruling has not been made into official law—and it does seem quite difficult to actually fulfill the criteria necessary to impose liability on a texter—many have commented rather negatively on the ruling, including New Jersey governor Chris Christie, who believes the responsibility ultimately should fall on the driver, not the texter.

The premise of the ruling does seem to make sense though—don’t intentionally distract a driver, particularly if it may lead to the driver to text.  And, based on the ruling, it doesn’t seem like there will be widespread rulings against texters, but I for one, may start limiting my texts.