Negligence Per Se Question

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
User avatar
Guchster
Posts: 1205
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 9:38 pm

Negligence Per Se Question

Postby Guchster » Wed Dec 14, 2011 2:05 am

This may be a stupid question, but you still have to establish causation (cause-in-fact and proximate cause) once you've determined that a D violated a statute, correct?

Part of the negligence per se analysis were trained to use was to consider whether P was person protected by statute and the type of harm she suffered was contemplated by the statute (or violation of the statute increased the risk that harm would occur). Isn't this technically a proximate cause analysis?

How would you set up an issue analysis to discuss this?
Last edited by Guchster on Wed Dec 14, 2011 2:56 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Stringer6
Posts: 5866
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 12:45 am

Re: Negligence Per Se Question

Postby Stringer6 » Wed Dec 14, 2011 2:22 am

Yes. Type of harm contemplated by statute = proximate cause.

User avatar
AVBucks4239
Posts: 870
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 11:37 pm

Re: Negligence Per Se Question

Postby AVBucks4239 » Wed Dec 14, 2011 1:42 pm

I was also thinking about this same question. It seems once you have established negligence per se (plaintiff suffered type of harm statute was meant to protect [foreseeable harm]/plaintiff was in the class of persons statute was meant to protect [foreseeable plaintiff]) that you've already established proximate cause.

So, when discussing causation, do you just discuss cause in fact, then refer the reader back to your negligence per se analysis for proximate cause?

User avatar
Arbiter213
Posts: 2249
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: Negligence Per Se Question

Postby Arbiter213 » Wed Dec 14, 2011 2:04 pm

They're seperate analyses with the same standard. It would be almost impossible to find negligence per se without finding proximate cause, however. So yes, you could just refer back to neg per se when you get to proximate cause.

User avatar
sundance95
Posts: 2123
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 7:44 pm

Re: Negligence Per Se Question

Postby sundance95 » Wed Dec 14, 2011 3:29 pm

I asked my professor about this just today; he said that while they are analogous, they are not equivalent. Further, limited statutory purpose is a question of law, while proximate cause is a question of fact.




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], wittywitless and 11 guests