Vince Sowerby Covers Negligence Per Se with a Focus on Distracted Driving

Negligence per se is a legal doctrine that streamlines the procedure of proving negligence in specific circumstances. Unlike traditional negligence claims, where plaintiffs must establish the defendant's duty of care, breach, causation, and damages, negligence per se automatically presumes a duty and breach when specific legal violations occur.

In summary, negligence per se arises when a defendant violates a statute or regulation designed to protect the public, and that violation directly causes harm to someone the law was intended to protect. This legal principle serves as a streamlined approach, 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 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 negligent per se.

### How Negligence Per Se Works

For negligence per se to be relevant, four elements must generally be met:
1. **The defendant broke a statute 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 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 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 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 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