Vince Sowerby Discusses the Link Between Distracted Driving and Negligence Per Se



Negligence Per Se is a legal doctrine that streamlines the process of proving negligence in certain circumstances. Unlike general negligence claims, where individuals must establish the defendant's duty of care, breach, causation, and damages, negligence per se automatically presumes a responsibility and breach when specific legal violations occur.

In essence, negligence per se arises when a defendant breaks a law or regulation designed to protect the public, and that violation directly causes harm to a person the law was intended to protect. This doctrine serves as a streamlined approach, allowing courts to focus on causation and damages rather than debating whether the defendant acted negligently.

One of the most common examples of negligence per se is **driver distraction**, a behavior that has become increasingly prevalent with the rise of smartphones and other distractions behind the wheel. Distracted driving laws, such as prohibitions against texting while driving, are designed to protect everyone on the road from preventable accidents. When a person violates these laws and causes an accident, they can be found automatically negligent.

### How Negligence Per Se Works

For negligence per se to be relevant, four factors must generally be met:
1. **The defendant broke a law or regulation** – For instance, texting while driving violates laws in most states.
2. **The law was enacted to prevent the type of harm that occurred** – Texting bans are intended to reduce car accidents caused by driver inattention.
3. **The plaintiff was among the group of people the law was designed to protect** – Road users, including drivers, passengers, cyclists, and pedestrians, are intended beneficiaries of distracted driving laws.
4. **The statutory violation caused the plaintiff’s injury** – A direct connection must be established between the violation and the harm, such as a collision caused by a driver who was texting.

When these criteria are met, the legal system presumes the defendant was negligent. This means the plaintiff doesn’t need to establish the defendant's behavior was unreasonable—only that it violated the law and caused harm.

### Distracted Driving as a Case Study

Imagine this scenario: A driver checks their phone to read a text message, runs a red light, and crashes into another vehicle. The driver broke a traffic law designed to prevent accidents, and their behavior directly caused harm. Under negligence per se, the injured party can argue that the statutory violation is enough to establish the driver’s negligence.




Watch Video

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Engaging Email Marketing Hacks That Go Beyond Merely Reaching Inboxes

Car Accident Lawyer Guide to After the Accident

Getting The Most Bang From Your Social Media Bucks