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

Negligence Per Se is a law principle that streamlines the process of proving negligence in certain circumstances. Unlike general negligence claims, where individuals must establish the defendant's obligation, breach, causation, and damages, negligence per se instantly presumes a responsibility and breach when particular legal violations occur.

In summary, negligence per se applies when a defendant breaks a statute or regulation designed to protect the public, and that violation directly causes harm to a person the law was meant 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 clearest 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 be relevant, four elements must typically be met:
1. **The defendant violated 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 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 crash 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 broke a statute and resulted in 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 crashes into 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