Negligence per se - distracted driving

The legal doctrine of negligence per se simplifies proving fault in specific cases. Built upon the concept of breaching one’s duty, this principle applies when a person breaks a regulation designed to protect others. Unlike traditional negligence, where plaintiffs must show unreasonable behavior, negligence per se sets liability when a legal rule is broken.

To better understand negligence per se, consider distracted driving—a common hazard on the roads. Attorney Vince Sowerby, a respected attorney specializing in personal injury cases, explains that this issue is often an example of this doctrine. “When drivers text, eat, or engage in distractions while driving, they frequently violate traffic laws intended to prevent harm. That violation itself can constitute negligence per se.

### Understanding Its Distinction from General Negligence

Negligence per se removes the need for plaintiffs to establish that a reasonable person would act differently. In general negligence cases, proving liability involves showing these four elements:
1. **Duty of Care** – The defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff.
2. **Breach of Duty** – The defendant breached that duty.
3. **Causation** – The breach caused harm.
4. **Damages** – The plaintiff suffered losses.

With negligence per se, the law itself defines the duty. When someone violates it, they have breached their duty. Sowerby notes, “The legal violation serves as proof.”

### Distracted Driving: A Prime Example

Distracted driving laws offer a clear example. Many states prohibit phone use or require hands-free devices. These statutes exist to protect drivers and pedestrians.

Suppose a driver is texting and rear-ends another vehicle. If texting while driving is illegal, the injured party can invoke negligence per se to establish liability. This framework eliminates questions about reasonableness because the violation itself confirms negligence.

### The Legal Framework

For negligence per se to be valid, certain criteria must be met:
1. **Statutory Violation** – The defendant violated a specific law.
2. **Protected Class** – The law must aim to safeguard the injured party.
3. **Harm Alignment** – The harm caused must be the specific injury the rule addresses.
4. **Causation** – The violation caused the harm.

Distracted driving laws often meet these criteria. For example, anti-texting laws prevent collisions. When a driver violates these laws, their actions directly correlate to the harm caused.

### Why It Matters

Negligence per se streamlines the legal process, especially in situations involving statutory violations. For plaintiffs, it removes ambiguity, allowing them to address the harm suffered.

Attorney Vince Sowerby highlights the importance of understanding this legal tool. “Many people hesitate to file claims because they fear the complexity. Negligence per se removes much of the guesswork, particularly when laws have been violated outright.”

### Conclusion

Negligence per se ensures accountability when laws meant to protect others are ignored. Distracted driving shows how this doctrine works. Vince Sowerby advises using this principle to claim the damages they deserve, reinforcing the value of public safety.

Watch Video