A Consumer Protection and Employment Law Firm Serving California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Illinois.

Cellphone use still common on California roadways

Table Of Contents
Summarize with
ChatGPT Claude Gemini Perplexity Grok
Though it has been illegal to use a hand-held phone in California for the last 10 years, the percentage of drivers using their phones while driving increased in 2018. According to people present at intersections around California, at any one moment, 4.5 percent of drivers were using their cellphones in 2018. This demonstrated an increase from 3.6 percent last year. Understandably, this has raised some concern with safety officials. Though social norms and beliefs surrounding phone usage while driving have caused the number of people texting-and driving to go down from 2016, when 7.6 percent were seen using their phone, the number even now is unacceptable, given the dangers of distracted driving. The study also found that drivers who were alone were eight times more likely to use their phones than those who had passengers, and less than two percent of drivers with children in their car used their phones. Rather than talk on the phone, drivers were using their phones to perform functions such as texting. Actually, a new law in California allows drivers to only use mounted phones, activated by one swipe-handheld use was banned in 2017. Drivers were also more likely to use their phones on local roads rather than highways. Distracted driving is a danger on any road and at any time. A car accident caused by distracted driving is one that could have been avoided entirely if the driver had been paying attention to the task at hand-driving. Holding a distracted driver accountable for their behavior through a personal injury lawsuit may provide much needed financial recovery to accident victims struggling with medical bills after the crash.

Quick Navigation

Free Consultation

Undisclosed
Settlement

TCPA class action against the Los Angeles Times. Final approval granted 2014.

More Details
$750,000
Settlement

Common fund class-wide TCPA settlement against home healthcare provider. Final approval granted.

More Details
$27.6M
Settlement

TCPA class action certified on behalf of approximately 2,000,000 class members under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3). Subsequently settled on a Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) basis. Final approval granted.

More Details
$5.2M
Settlement

/

Unruh Act class action on behalf of approximately 240,000 consumers challenging Tinder’s age-based differential pricing for its subscription service. Final approval granted; subsequently went up on appeal.

More Details
$390,000
Settlement

TCPA class action alleging HD Supply sent unauthorized marketing text messages to consumers’ mobile phones without consent between October 21, 2011 and July 26, 2017. Presided over by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Case terminated January 29, 2018.

More Details
$1,500,000
Settlement

/

TCPA class action against a Kansas-based payday lender alleged to have contacted consumers via prerecorded calls on their cell phones to collect alleged debts without consent. California federal judge granted final approval.

More Details
$6,500,000
Settlement

/

Cal. Penal Code § 632.7 class action certified by contested motion under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) on behalf of over 40,000 class members whose calls were recorded without their knowledge or consent. Final approval granted.

More Details
$13,000,000
Settlement

/

$13 Million Class action alleging HSBC recorded consumer telephone calls without knowledge or consent in violation of California’s Privacy Statute (Penal Code § 632.7). California Federal Judge granted final approval.

More Details
$34,000,000
Settlement

/

One of the largest TCPA class action settlements in U.S. history at time of approval. Alleged Chase used an automatic telephone dialing system to contact consumers on their cell phones without prior express consent from July 2008 through December 2013. Settlement class included over 32 million members. Final approval granted March 2016.

More Details
$150,000,000
Settlement

/

Class action on behalf of over 100,000 owners of GM vehicles equipped with allegedly defective LG-manufactured batteries posing fire and safety risks. Litigation commenced December 2020. U.S. District Judge Terrence G. Berg indicated preliminary approval of the $150 million settlement.

More Details
$100,000,000
Settlement

/ /

Landmark gig-economy class action. DoorDash drivers in California and Massachusetts alleged they were wrongly classified as independent contractors rather than employees. Firm served as class counsel. Final approval granted January 13, 2022 — the largest gig-economy worker class settlement in U.S. history at the time.

More Details

Office Locations

Copyright 2025 Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. All Rights Reserved.