When Can Negligence Per Se in Torts?

Negligence per se applies when a defendant violates a statute or regulation designed to protect a specific class of individuals from harm, and this violation is the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injury.

Negligence per se is a legal doctrine that arises in tort law when a defendant's conduct constitutes a violation of a statute or regulation. To establish negligence per se, the plaintiff must demonstrate that (1) the defendant violated a law that was intended to protect the class of people to which the plaintiff belongs, and (2) the violation caused the injury that the statute was designed to prevent. This shifts the burden of proof away from the plaintiff having to prove the standard of care, as the statute establishes what the standard should have been.

An essential aspect of negligence per se is that the law violated must be a safety statute enacted to prevent a type of harm that occurred. For example, if a driver ignores a stop sign (a traffic regulation) and strikes a pedestrian, the violation of the stop sign can be considered negligence per se, as the purpose of the statute is to protect pedestrians from being struck by vehicles. Courts will often evaluate if the plaintiff falls within the class of people the statute is meant to protect and whether the harm inflicted is of the nature the statute was intended to prevent.

However, it is important to note that not every violation of a statute will result in negligence per se. The statute must be relevant to the case at hand. Furthermore, the defendant may defend against negligence per se by arguing they had a valid excuse for breaching the statute, such as an emergency situation. Courts will assess all circumstances surrounding the statute's violation, including whether a reasonable person could foresee the consequences of their actions.

Notable case law surrounding negligence per se includes *Martin v. Herzog* (1920), where a driver operating without headlights violated a statute, leading to a finding of negligence per se against him; *Geary v. McGowan* (1971), which affirmed the doctrine by acknowledging the principle in applying statutes to torts; and *Parker v. Johnson* (1984), which illustrated the necessity of proving that the plaintiff belonged to the class intended to be protected under the statute. These cases collectively solidify the foundational principles of negligence per se within tort law.

• 1Martin v. Herzog (1920) - established the principle of negligence per se when a statute is violated.
• 2Geary v. McGowan (1971) - illustrated application of negligence per se in a tort context.
• 3Parker v. Johnson (1984) - demonstrated the importance of the plaintiff being a member of the protected class.

• what-is-negligence
• comparative-negligence-standards
• duty-of-care-in-torts