If a statutory violation is regarded as mere evidence of the violator's "n"egligence, the trier of fact remains free to exercise its own judgment in determining whether or not to apply the statutory standard of care to the conduct of the R.P.P. in any given negligence case, or whether, instead, to substitute some other standard of reasonable conduct, based solely upon the individual circumstances unique to each particular statutory violation. Thus, under the evidence of "n"egligence approach, the trier of fact is permitted to exercise its own judgment in deciding whether any given statutory violation is or is not "reasonable" under the circumstances. The statutory standard is not absolute (as it is in the "n"egligence per se approach). It may be applied in those circumstances deemed appropriate by the trier of fact, or it may be disregarded altogether, in favor of some other standard based upon "reasonable" care. This approach to statutory violations in most negligence cases invariably leads to a case-by-case determination (by the trier of fact) as to the "reasonableness" of each alleged statutory violator's conduct.

Copyright 1999 by Edward C. Martin
Last modified: 10/08/01