Proving a Driver Was Texting on I-40

Many drivers involved in crashes on I-40 report seeing the other motorist glance down at a phone moments before impact. It may happen when a vehicle drifts across lanes near the I-35 interchange or during a rear-end collision in heavy traffic approaching downtown Oklahoma City. Even when distraction seems likely based on what someone observed, the other driver may deny using a phone at the scene.

Situations like this occur often on Interstate 40 in Oklahoma. In 2022, distracted driving contributed to 3,308 deaths and an estimated 289,310 injuries nationwide. When there is no immediate objective proof, it can feel difficult to show that phone use played a role in the crash.

During the legal process, phone records are one type of evidence that may help clarify what happened. Through discovery, attorneys may request Call Detail Records (CDRs) from phone carriers to determine whether there was call, text, or data activity around the time of the collision on I-40.

Call (314) 300-0314 or contact us online today for a free consultation.

Key Takeaways for Proving Texting and Driving Accidents on I-40

During the discovery process, attorneys may request cell phone records from carriers such as AT&T, Verizon, or T-Mobile. Call Detail Records can show timestamps for calls, texts, or data usage that may help determine whether phone activity occurred around the time of an I-40 collision.
The process usually begins with sending preservation requests to carriers after an accident, followed by filing a lawsuit, which allows subpoenas to be issued under Oklahoma civil procedure. Carriers generally respond to properly served subpoenas within several weeks, though timelines vary.
Phone records typically show metadata including timestamps, duration, and phone numbers rather than actual text content. This type of activity log may help clarify whether the driver was using their phone near the time of the crash.
Carriers have different retention periods for call logs, text metadata, data usage records, and other information. Because some records may be deleted on routine schedules, acting early helps preservation requests reach carriers before data is removed.
The expenses involved in obtaining phone records—such as court filing fees, subpoena service costs, and carrier production charges—are usually handled as part of the overall litigation process. In contingency-fee cases, these costs are generally covered as part of case expenses rather than paid upfront by the injured person.

What Cell Phone Records Show in Accident Cases

Cell phone records may offer objective, timestamped information that helps clarify whether a driver was using their phone around the time of a crash. Understanding the types of data carriers maintain can help explain how this evidence fits into an overall I-40 accident investigation.

Call Detail Records Provide Timestamps and Activity Logs

Call Detail Records document interactions between a device and the carrier’s network. These records list incoming and outgoing calls with timestamps, call duration, and the numbers involved. Text logs indicate when SMS messages were sent or received, although carriers generally do not provide the actual content of messages in civil cases.

Data-usage logs can also play a role in distracted-driving investigations. These records may show when a device accessed the internet, used apps, checked email, or streamed content, along with the time and duration of activity.

Some carriers also retain cell-site location information (CSLI), which shows the tower and sector a phone connected to during certain activities. CSLI can help indicate whether the device was in the general area of the crash, though it does not provide precise GPS-level detail..

Understanding What Phone Records Cannot Show

Phone records document activity on the device but cannot confirm who was holding or operating the phone at the time. They may show that a call occurred, but not whether it was hands-free. Likewise, while timestamps indicate when a text was sent or received, they do not prove where the driver’s eyes or hands were at that moment.

Because of these limits, phone activity is often reviewed with other evidence. Statements from people who witnessed the crash may help describe what they saw. Certain accident patterns—such as a rear-end collision with no sign of braking—can also support a broader analysis of possible distraction. In some cases, information about whether the driver had passengers may help rule out alternate explanations.

Records showing activity close to the time of the crash may be useful in presenting a full picture of what was happening before impact.

The Legal Process: From Preservation to Production

Civil discovery provides a structured way to request phone records during an I-40 accident case. This process involves several steps that help identify and preserve relevant information when available.

Preservation Letters Help Prevent Data Loss

Soon after a crash, attorneys commonly send preservation letters to major carriers such as AT&T, Verizon, or T-Mobile. These letters identify the involved phone number and the general timeframe of the incident so carriers can retain existing records. Subpoenas or court orders may follow, depending on the needs of the case and what information is sought.

Because each carrier maintains different retention schedules, early action helps reduce the risk that routine deletion might remove potentially useful data.

Filing a Lawsuit Allows Subpoenas to Be Issued

In Oklahoma, a lawsuit is generally required before subpoenas can be issued for phone records. Under 12 O.S. § 95, personal injury claims must be filed within two years. Many claims are filed earlier when phone records are important to the investigation.

Once the lawsuit is filed and served, the discovery phase begins. During this phase, subpoenas may be issued under Oklahoma civil procedure, and court orders may be requested if additional authorization is needed to obtain records.

Subpoenaing Phone Carriers Requires Clear Requests

Subpoenas for phone records generally need to be specific so carriers understand what is being requested. These requests often identify the phone number, outline the date and time range surrounding the crash, and list categories of records that may be relevant.

Typical record requests may include CDRs, text-message metadata, data-usage logs, CSLI, and account verification documents. Subpoenas are served on the carrier’s registered agent and include notice to the opposing party.

Carriers usually respond within several weeks of proper service, although response times vary based on the scope of the request and the carrier’s procedures.

How Phone Records May Support an Accident Claim

When phone records are produced, they may offer information that helps clarify disputed facts in a distracted-driving investigation. These records are reviewed alongside other evidence to understand the full picture of what was happening before the crash. In many cases, phone activity helps explain the sequence of events and supports the broader analysis of how the collision occurred.

Correlating Activity With the Accident Timeline

Phone activity occurring close to the time of the crash may be important in understanding possible distraction. For example, if a text was sent or received within seconds of an incident, that timing may be considered when evaluating what the driver was doing.

Patterns of activity can also be useful even without an exact‐second match. For example:

Sustained data usage in the minutes leading up to the collision may indicate ongoing interaction with the phone.
A text received shortly before the impact might suggest the driver looked down.
Multiple calls or texts during the hour prior to the crash may indicate frequent phone involvement.
A call in progress during the collision may help show the driver was on the phone at that moment.

In some cases, experts review phone metadata and other available information. These experts may analyze how the timing of phone activity aligns with vehicle movement or crash dynamics and explain how the records fit into the overall assessment of the event.

Addressing Common Defense Arguments

Defense teams often raise questions about what phone records mean. They may point out that a passenger could have been using the device, that a call might have been hands-free, or that phone activity alone does not establish causation.

These issues are typically considered along with all other evidence. Information about whether the driver was alone may help address the “passenger used the phone” theory. Oklahoma law, including 47 O.S. § 11-901b, prohibits texting while driving, and statutory violations can be relevant in evaluating negligence. Beginning November 1, 2025, Oklahoma also now prohibits handheld phone use in marked school and construction zones under HB 2263, broadening the restrictions on device handling.

Accident-scene evidence such as lack of braking or delayed reaction may help support a distraction theory when combined with phone activity. Reviewing all available evidence together often provides a more complete understanding of what happened.

I-40 Presents Unique Evidence Challenges and Opportunities

Interstate 40 through Oklahoma City creates conditions where phone records may play an important role in evaluating distraction. The speeds involved and the layout of the highway can make it difficult to determine what happened without objective electronic evidence. Understanding these factors helps explain why phone activity may be relevant in some I-40 accident investigations.

High-Speed Collisions and the Importance of Timing

In certain stretches, I-40 has speed limits up to 75 mph, with lower speeds through Oklahoma City. Even at city speeds, a brief glance at a phone can translate into traveling a significant distance without watching the road. When collisions occur at these speeds, physical evidence may be limited or scattered, especially in rural areas where witnesses may be unavailable.

Phone records can supplement traditional evidence when on-scene details are incomplete. In some crashes, officers may not be able to determine distraction from the physical evidence alone, and phone logs may help clarify whether activity occurred close to the time of impact. These records become part of the overall effort to piece together what happened.

The downtown Oklahoma City segment of I-40 includes busy areas such as the I-35/I-40 junction, the I-235 interchange, and exits for Western Avenue, Meridian, and MLK Boulevard. These areas require frequent merging and lane changes, and distracted driving may contribute to collisions in these sections.

Commercial Vehicle Accidents Provide Additional Evidence Sources

I-40 is a major freight corridor, and accidents involving commercial vehicles may include more electronic data than typical passenger-vehicle cases. Phone records are one part of the picture, but other systems may provide additional insight.

Commercial carriers often use Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs), which record driving hours, sudden braking, and other vehicle events. Fleet GPS systems monitor a truck’s movement, and many companies install inward- and outward-facing cameras that can show driver behavior and roadway conditions.

When available, these data sources may be reviewed together. For example, if phone records show activity around the time of the crash and ELD or GPS data show sudden slowing or movement patterns, the combined information may help explain the circumstances of the collision. These materials are generally preserved through written requests during the early stages of a case.

Acting Early Helps Preserve Critical Evidence

Time can affect the availability of phone records because carriers maintain data for limited periods based on their internal retention schedules. When too much time passes, certain records may no longer be available. Taking steps early in the process helps increase the chance that relevant information can be preserved and requested during litigation.

Oklahoma’s two-year statute of limitations also affects the overall timeline. Even when action is taken promptly, the process of obtaining phone records typically unfolds over several months:

Week 1-2: Preservation letters are often sent to carriers.
Week 4-8: A lawsuit may be prepared and filed.
Week 8-12: Subpoenas may be issued after service.
Week 12-20: Carriers may respond with available records.

These timeframes can vary based on carrier procedures, case complexity, and court requirements. Acting earlier in the process means there’s more time to complete each step before statutory deadlines or routine data deletion become limiting factors.

How Phone Records May Influence Case Development

Insurance companies sometimes dispute liability when there is no objective evidence addressing distraction. Adjusters may rely on the driver’s denial or argue that the cause of the crash is unclear. Phone records are one type of information that may help address those disputes by adding a timestamped view of device activity.

When phone activity aligns closely with the timeline of the crash, it may strengthen the overall analysis of how the collision occurred. This type of evidence can affect how a case is evaluated by insurers, especially when combined with physical evidence, witness statements, or accident-scene documentation.

Phone records tend to be more significant in cases involving serious injuries, where understanding the sequence of events becomes especially important. I-40 collisions can involve high speeds or heavy traffic, and injuries such as traumatic brain injuries or spinal damage may require a thorough examination of how the crash unfolded.

FAQ for Proving Texting and Driving Accidents on I-40

Do I need the other driver’s permission to get their phone records?

No. Under Oklahoma civil procedure, phone records may be requested from carriers through subpoenas once a lawsuit has been filed. Subpoenas are directed to the carrier as a third party, and the involved driver cannot prevent a properly issued subpoena from being served or processed.

What if the driver deleted texts before we requested records?

Deleted content does not necessarily eliminate useful evidence. While carriers generally do not provide the content of text messages in civil cases, they often maintain metadata—such as timestamps, phone numbers, and certain activity logs—that may still show when messaging activity occurred. This metadata is sometimes used in evaluating whether phone activity aligns with the timeline of a crash.

Can insurance companies obtain phone records without filing a lawsuit?

Generally, insurers do not have subpoena power in civil cases and cannot compel phone carriers to produce subscriber records. Subpoenas are typically issued only after a lawsuit has begun, which allows parties in the litigation—not insurance adjusters—to request those records directly from carriers.

How do phone records work in commercial truck cases on I-40?

Commercial vehicle cases may involve additional data sources beyond phone records. Many trucking companies use Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs), fleet GPS tracking, and inward- or outward-facing cameras. When available, these materials may be requested along with phone records to help understand driver activity, vehicle movement, and roadway conditions before the collision.

What happens if phone records don’t show activity right at the exact time of the crash?

Phone logs may still be useful even when the activity does not match the crash time precisely. Activity in the minutes leading up to or shortly after an incident may be considered when evaluating potential distraction. Experts sometimes explain how cognitive distraction can continue after a call or message and how those effects might relate to delayed reactions or lack of braking at the scene.

Take Action Now to Preserve Phone Evidence

Phone carriers maintain records based on internal retention schedules, and certain data may be removed after those periods expire. Beginning the evidence-preservation process early increases the chance that relevant records will still exist when subpoenas are issued.

The team at DM Injury Law assists clients with the steps involved in requesting and reviewing phone evidence. This includes preparing preservation letters, filing lawsuits when necessary to issue subpoenas, and organizing the records produced by carriers. Our firm includes more than 70 attorneys and 250 staff members who support case development and evidence management.

DM Injury Law has recovered over $900 million for injury victims across multiple states. Each case involves different facts, but a consistent approach to gathering available evidence helps present the full picture. Phone records are one type of information that may assist in evaluating whether distraction played a role.

If you were injured in an I-40 crash and believe phone use may have been involved, contact DM Injury Law at (405) 295-0622 or reach out online for a free consultation. We are available 24/7, and cases are handled on a contingency-fee basis, meaning legal fees are collected only if compensation is recovered.