Vince Sowerby Discusses Negligence Per Se and Distracted Driving

Negligence per se is a legal doctrine that streamlines the process of proving negligence in certain circumstances. Unlike traditional negligence claims, where plaintiffs must establish the defendant's duty of care, breach, causation, and damages, negligence per se instantly presumes a duty and breach when particular legal violations occur.
In summary, negligence per se arises when a defendant breaks a law or regulation designed to ensure public safety, and that violation directly causes harm to a person the law was intended to protect. This legal principle serves as a shortcut, 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 someone breaks these laws and causes an accident, they can be found negligent per se.
### How Negligence Per Se Works
For negligence per se to apply, four factors must typically be met:
1. **The defendant violated a statute or regulation** – For instance, texting while driving violates laws in most states.
2. **The statute was enacted to prevent the type of harm that occurred** – Texting bans aim 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 motorists, passengers, cyclists, and pedestrians, are intended beneficiaries of distracted driving laws.
4. **The statutory violation caused the plaintiff’s injury** – A clear connection must be established between the violation and the harm, such as a crash 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 prove the defendant's behavior was unreasonable—only that it violated the law and resulted in harm.
### Distracted Driving as a Case Study
Consider this scenario: A driver glances at 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
Post a Comment