Reckless driving is a criminal offense, not a civil tort. While texting or in other ways taking your attention off the road is stupid, it does not meet the statutory requirements for criminal conduct. Careless, yes; reckless, no. The difference is that criminal conduct requires specific intent to commit the action while simple negligence does not require intent. This is why punitive damages cannot be awarded in cases like this.

He is entitled to compensatory damages for the repair of his vehicle and any actual medical expenses that he has. To that end, I am a bit disturbed that some people here are insinuating that he claim some sort of personal injury when he previously has stated that he has no actual injuries. If he is uninjured then it is unethical for him to claim injury in order to get more money. Bogus injury claims and their associated expense are one of the main reasons why insurance premiums are so high and why unscrupulous attorneys, physicians, and chiropractors flourish. He absolutely should get examined if he has not done so yet, but it is wrong to assume that the crash he was involved in would automatically cause injury.

States differ in their laws regarding what damages can be claimed in crash cases. Some states only allow a claimant to receive damages from consequential losses (loss of profit/use) if the property is used for business purposes. Other states allow this in all cases. The issue with consequential losses is that there must be a way to prove exactly how much the consequential loss is. Everyone knows that vehicles in collissions are worth less, however it can be difficult to prove exactly how much the value has been reduced.