Vince Sowerby’s Insights on Distracted Driving as Negligence Per Se

Negligence per se is a legal doctrine that simplifies the procedure of proving negligence in specific circumstances. Unlike traditional 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 applies when a defendant breaks a law or regulation designed to ensure public safety, and that violation clearly causes harm to a person 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 **distracted driving**, 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 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 broke a statute 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 clear connection must exist between the violation and the harm, such as a collision caused by a driver who was texting.
When these criteria are met, the court presumes the defendant was negligent. This means the plaintiff doesn’t need to establish the defendant's behavior was careless—only that it violated the law and caused harm.
### Distracted Driving as a Case Study
Imagine this scenario: A driver glances at their phone to read a text message, runs a red light, and collides with another vehicle. The driver broke a traffic law designed to prevent accidents, and their behavior clearly 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