Negligence Per Se

Summary

-conclusively establishes that Defendant was negligent -statute must apply to the facts -Plaintiff must be a member of the class of people the statute was intended to protect -causal link between violation & injury -can have comparative negligence

Industry Standards

parties may refer to the industry standards both as a sword and as a shield Juries will be allowed to consider rules in manuals or handbooks that companies/governments use to govern employees

Excuses

1 - violation is reasonable due to actor's incapacity 2 - neither knows nor should know of the occasion for compliance 3 - unable after reasonable diligence or care to comply 4 - confronted by emergency (not due to his own making) 5 - compliance would involve a greater risk of harm "Not intended to be an exclusive list"

3 Requirements

1 - violation of statute 2 - statute was designed to protect against the same type of accident that Defendant's conduct caused 3 - Plaintiff is one of the class of persons the statute was designed to protect

Reasonable Person vs. Negligence Per Se

can argue reasonable person while saying there is negligence per se

Complying with the Statute

complying with the statute does not itself establish that Defendant was not negligent

Negligence Per Se - Definition

when a safety statute has sufficiently close application to the facts of the case at hand (an unexcused violation of the statute)

Illegal Acts

you cannot predict illegal acts, and are not required to foresee them