Under the doctrine of negligence per se, a plaintiff can establish both duty and breach of duty if the defendant violated a statute that was designed to protect the defendant from the type of injury sustained. If the court in a negligence case determined that Plaintiff had established negligence per se, which of the following facts would be the most important to the court's determination?
A)That Defendant was driving a stolen vehicle at the time, and that laws prohibiting auto theft are designed to protect vehicle owners from theft.
B)That Defendant ran a red light and injured Plaintiff in a collision, and that laws prohibiting traffic signal violations are designed to protect against injuries.
C)That Defendant was violating the speed limit at the time his car collided with Plaintiff's vehicle.
D)That Defendant's car collided with Plaintiff's vehicle when Plaintiff ran a red light.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

That Defendant ran a red light, and that laws prohibiting the violation of traffic signals are designed to protect vehicle owners from injuries and property damage. Answer B is correct because it establishes that Defendant violated a traffic law and that the traffic law was designed to protect against injuries. In other words, it meets the negligence per se rule. Answer A is not correct because the laws against auto theft are designed to protect property, not protect against injuries. Answer C and Answer D are both incorrect because neither says anything about a court finding that a law protected against injuries to others.

Under the Doctrine of Negligence Per Se, a Plaintiff Can