Michigan Senate Passes Bill That Would Allow Self-Driving Cars on Michigan Roads

In an effort to remain a state leader in the auto industry, the Michigan Senate passed Senate Bill 169 this week that, if the Michigan House also passes the bill, would allow manufacturers to test self-driving cars on Michigan  public roads.  Florida, Nevada, and California have already passed similar laws.  The Michigan Bill requires that a human operator be present in the self-driving car to assume control in case of an emergency.   Governor Synder, during his recent State of the State speech, challenged the Legislature to pass an autonomous driving law to allow Michigan to retain its claim as the "automotive capitol of the world." Legislators believe that this Bill will get some minor tweaking in the House and then be sent to the Governor's desk for signing into law by the end of March. 

Some manufacturers believe that because crash avoidance technology has progressed so rapidly that there could be self-driving cars that will be ready for the public marketplace and public roadways within only a few years rather than being decades away.  If this is true then the Legislators should begin working on new legislation that will decide who becomes liable for damages caused by self-driving cars that do not avoid a crash and injure passengers or occupants of other vehicles. Additionally, the Legislature needs to come up with modifications to the No-Fault law for the division of responsibilities between insurance companies when two or more autonomous vehicles collide due to technical malfunctions or human error in programming the self-driving cars.  Technology experts speak about a future where the slow adopter of technology that still utilizes a human driver could be the most dangerous and unpredictable vehicle on the road.   These slow adopters may have to pay more for insurance just for the privilege of driving his / her own car.  Americans' stubborn independence and love-of-driving may be what slows this future prediction of highways full of autonomous driving vehicles.  

Dangerous Stretch of I-94, East of Jackson

For years, travelers and others along I-94 in southeastern Michigan have been pushing for construction on the freeway around the intersection of I-94 and Kalmbach road.  Going east from Jackson, the freeway makes a hard right, only to immediately turn back.  Ideally, it would be straightened out such that  the dangerous curve, past Kalmbach road east of Jackson, would be eliminated.

An investigation began in 2004 which concluded that this stretch had the second-highest number of auto accidents in Washtenaw County from 2005-2007.  In an article on Mlive.com, 48,5000 cars traveled per day on this section of I-94 near Kalmbach road during the study period. According to the Washtenaw Area Transportation Study, in 2007 there were 87 crashes, in 2006, 57 wrecks, and in 2005, 68.

The state hesitates to fix this section of road because it has limited money to undertake such projects.  If there is no identified money that can be used to fix a problem like this, then the state will not initiate a study to determine what needs to be done to realign the section of freeway.  If there are no future plans to change this stretch of highway then travelers should use caution and slow down when driving around I-94 east of Jackson, because statistically, this section in southeastern Michigan is one of the most accident-prone.

Reconsidering the Legal Driving Level of Blood Alcohol Content

A law is currently being considered in the Michigan House of Representatives that would keep the blood alcohol content level at .08 instead of raising it to .1. In 2003, a law was passed which decreased the legal driving level of blood alcohol content (BAC) to .08, but that is set to expired on October 1st, 2013.

The negotiating process started today, February 13th, in the House Criminal Justice Committee.  Supporters of the bill, argue that the lower BAC threshold has been an important reason why drinking and driving deaths and injuring auto accidents have significantly decreased in the State of Michigan.

Failing to pass the bill would also result in the Michigan Department of Transportation losing an estimated $50 million an article on Mlive stated. Under the 2003 bill, the federal government promised money to states in exchange for their moving the legal limit to .08. Michigan already struggles to repair its roads and highways.  However, more important than money are lives saved.  Today Mothers Against Dunk Driving and others are advocating for the .08 BAC level to remain where it is.  Follow this link to the State of Michigan's webpage which outlines the current substance abuse policy. 

New Michigan Law On Driving While Intoxicated on Prescription Drugs

In the flurry of end-of-year activity and the heightened media coverage of the passage of the Right-to-Work Legislation in December 2012, the Michigan Legislature also passed Public Act 543 with the intention to “close the loop” of driving under the influence laws so that substances other than alcohol were also included, such as marijuana.  The Law was signed on January 2, 2013 by Governor Synder and becomes effective on March 31, 2013.   Although the Legislation may have been well intended, Public Act 543 may need reconsideration and modification to address serious concerns brought up by both the legal and medical professions.  Many attorneys are concerned that the Law’s definition of “intoxicating substance” is so broad that the general public will be unable to determine what drugs would cause a person to be potentially liable for “driving under the influence” and subject to arrest.   According to the Law, “intoxicating substance” refers to any substance or preparation listed as a drug in The Official United States Pharmacopeia, The Official Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia of the United States or The Official National Formulary.  The Law also defines an intoxicating substance as “a substance, other than food, that is used in a manner or for a purpose for which it was not intended, and that may result in a condition of intoxication.”

“The use of specific publications to define a criminal offense creates a serious problem when citizens do not have access to the publications and when the publications change frequently.  It leaves the drivers of Michigan in between a rock and a hard spot.  Either they spend a significant amount of money each year to have access to the publications or they roll the dice and risk being charged with a criminal offense” says attorney Joshua M. Covert.

Doctors are also concerned that the Law’s definition of “intoxicating” substances includes almost all of the medications prescribed for behavioral health patients, high blood pressure medications, antihistamines, decongestants and many other commonly prescribed medications which physicians did not fathom would be included under the Law.  For example, people with allergies could potentially be “under the influence” of an” intoxicating substance” if they take a Sudafed to stop their nose from running and then decide to drive.   Physician groups are disappointed that neither the Michigan Legislature nor the Governor’s Office consulted with medical professional groups to consider the full impact of the Law.  Many Physician groups are now contacting the Michigan Department of Community Health to create a response to the legislation because of its perceived disastrous potential impact on the public.

The Full text of the Law can be seen at:  http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/publicact/pdf/2012-PA-0543.pdf

Obviously, this new Law was designed to protect the public from dangerous drivers who make poor choices in regards to the use of intoxicating substances; however, it appears that a better balance can be accomplished by more concise legislative drafting to protect  both Michigan drivers from being seriously injured by dangerously intoxicated persons and avoid restricting a large segment of the population from ever driving when taking necessary physician prescribed medications.  

Please contact your State Representative or Senator to share your concerns and / or comments regarding Public Act 543. 

Achieving a Fair Value for Your “Totaled” Car

Adjusters often try to persuade their insurance clients into accepting less than they are entitled. Adjusters will use tactics such as discounting the value of certain options and then threatening to take the entire matter to arbitration when the client disagrees with the valuation. Most insurance contracts do contain an arbitration clause that mandate binding arbitration when there are disagreements as to value. Some insurance adjusters try to scare their own clients into accepting the lower valuation by stating that if the disagreement goes to arbitration, the client will have to pay more in arbitration costs, expert appraiser fees, and attorney costs than the difference in the disputed value. You can increase the valuation amount by using Internet resources to serve as the basis for your value arguments. KellyBlue Book and the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) websites are easy to use and will allow you to select the model, make, year, and options to generate a fair value. Insurance adjusters often feel that the Kelly Blue Book values are too high and aimed at the consumer market (classified ads) rather than the car dealer’s market. Adjusters generally believe the NADA values are more accurate since it is more likely that a replacement vehicle with identical options would be found at a car dealership rather than through the classified ads. However, insurance adjusters don’t account for dealer mark-ups that get tacked on to the trade-in-values taken from NADA. You can also search the Internet for a car dealer ad for a similar car and use the ad prices as an additional basis for your increased value argument. You also should insist that sales tax is added to the final valuation amount since this is a cost that you will have to bear when you purchase a replacement vehicle. Sometimes these valuation strategies are not enough and an attorney should intervene in order to cut or reverse the intimidation and games that some insurance adjusters play.

Governor Signs Kelsey's Law Banning Cell Phone Use for Level 1 & 2 Teenage Drivers

On Tuesday, January 8, 2013, Governor Rick Synder signed a new legislative act that has been named "Kelsey's Law."  The law prohibits all new drivers on their probationary licenses from talking on their phone while driving.  Violation of the law by teenagers will be a civil infraction that could cause a young driver an extension of their probationary license period.  The law applies to all Level 1 license holders that can only drive with a parent, guardian, or person over 21 years old.  The law also applies to Level 2 drivers that are allowed to drive with limits such as restricted hours of driving and transporting other young passengers.   Kelsey's law, Senate Bill 756, will take effect in late March 2013.

The law was named in the memory of Kelsey Raffaele, a Sault Ste. Marie teenager, who died in January 2010 when she caused a serious auto accident while talking on her cellphone and trying to pass another vehicle on a two-lane highway.  Kelsey's surviving mother, father, and twin sister, Courtney, were present at the Governor's signing ceremony in Lansing.  Kelsey's sister Courtney had lobbied members of the State House and Senate to get Kelsey's law passed into law.  Kelsey's mother, Bonnie Raffaele, stated after the law's signing ceremony "I know that Kelsey is up in heaven just clapping and screaming for joy over this because of the lives that can be saved through (her) tragic death."

A Car's Crash Data Retrieval Module Can Provide Valuable Evidence for an Auto Accident Trial

Most people don't realize that many newer makes and models of automobiles contain a Crash Data Retrieval (CDR) tool as part of the airbag control module.   Even if the airbag does not deploy, the CDR records data once it is "activated" by a sudden change in direction, sudden rotations, or hard braking that often occur just prior to an accident.  The CDR makes an electronic record of important data like speed, braking, steering angle, order of impact, seat belt use, presence of an occupant, and impact severity (change in velocity / delta v forces) in the few seconds before the crash.  Different car makes and models record different amounts of data and different number of "events."  This electronic data can be retrieved by an expert technologist and the data is often used by law enforcement officers, accident reconstructionist, government researchers, insurance adjusters, and attorneys.  It is very important that your attorney has the experience and knowledge of how to preserve this information for a trial or negotiations with insurance companies.