Vince Sowerby: Negligence Per Se and Distracted Driving in Focus

Negligence Per Se is a legal doctrine that streamlines the procedure of proving negligence in specific circumstances. Unlike general negligence claims, where plaintiffs must establish the defendant's obligation, breach, causation, and damages, negligence per se automatically presumes a duty and breach when specific legal violations occur.
In essence, negligence per se arises when a defendant violates a law or regulation designed to ensure public safety, and that violation clearly causes harm to someone the law was intended to protect. This legal principle serves as a shortcut, allowing judges to focus on causation and damages rather than debating whether the defendant was at fault.
One of the most common examples of negligence per se is **driver distraction**, a behavior that has grown more common with the rise of smartphones and other distractions behind the wheel. Distracted driving laws, such as prohibitions against texting while driving, are designed to safeguard everyone on the road from avoidable accidents. When a person violates these laws and causes an accident, they can be found negligent per se.
### How Negligence Per Se Works
For negligence per se to be relevant, four elements must typically be met:
1. **The defendant broke a law or regulation** – For instance, texting while driving goes against laws in most states.
2. **The law 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 direct 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 establish the defendant's behavior was careless—only that it broke a statute and caused 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 collides with another vehicle. The driver violated 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