What Is “Negligence Per Se” and When Does It Apply in Tempe?
When you’re injured in a car accident in Tempe, proving fault usually means showing the other driver was careless. But in some cases, you don’t have to go that far. If the other driver broke a law designed to keep people safe, Arizona courts may consider them automatically negligent under a legal principle called negligence per se.
It’s a powerful tool — and one that can make a major difference in how your claim is handled. If you were hurt near Downtown Tempe or South Tempe, and you know the other driver broke the law, a Tempe car accident attorney can help determine whether negligence per se applies.
What Does “Negligence Per Se” Mean?
“Negligence per se” is a Latin term that means negligence in itself. Under Arizona law, it applies when:
The defendant violated a statute or regulation
The law was intended to protect people from the type of harm that occurred
The victim is part of the group the law was meant to protect
If those conditions are met, then the act of breaking the law is automatically considered a breach of the duty of care — one of the key elements in any personal injury case.
In plain English: if someone breaks the law and hurts you in the process, they may already be legally considered negligent.
Common Tempe Car Accident Scenarios Involving Negligence Per Se
Negligence per se often comes into play in cases where the at-fault driver broke a traffic safety law, such as:
Running a red light or stop sign
Texting while driving (illegal in Arizona)
Driving under the influence (DUI)
Speeding or racing
Failing to yield to pedestrians in a crosswalk
So if you were hit by a driver who blew through a stop sign in Holdeman, you may not have to prove they were “careless.” The act of breaking the law could be enough.
This also applies in injury cases involving:
Rideshare accidents where the driver violated a commercial driving regulation
How It Helps Your Injury Claim
In a standard negligence case, your lawyer has to prove:
The defendant owed you a duty of care
They breached that duty
That breach caused your injury
You suffered actual damages
But when negligence per se applies, step 2 — the breach — is presumed. That makes your case stronger and harder for the insurance company to dispute.
For example, if a distracted driver ran a red light in Meyer Park and hit you, the fact they violated traffic laws can establish negligence without further argument.
What Negligence Per Se Doesn’t Automatically Prove
While it helps establish fault, negligence per se doesn’t prove causation or damages. You still need to show:
That the traffic violation directly caused your injuries
That your injuries are real, documented, and crash-related
This is where medical records, photos, and expert testimony become critical — especially in serious cases involving spinal cord injuries, TBI, or paralysis.
Can the Defense Challenge Negligence Per Se?
Yes. The defense might argue:
The statute doesn’t apply to your type of injury
You were also breaking a law (e.g., jaywalking or speeding)
The violation didn’t cause the crash or injuries
In Arizona, comparative fault rules still apply — so even if the other driver was negligent per se, your recovery could be reduced if you’re found partially at fault.
Why It’s Important to Identify Early
If negligence per se applies to your case, your attorney can:
Use it to pressure the insurance company for a better settlement
Limit the arguments available to the defense
Strengthen your position at trial, if needed
This is especially powerful in cases where injuries are severe — such as rollovers, hit-and-runs, or high-speed T-bone crashes.
Final Thought
Negligence per se takes the guesswork out of proving fault in many Tempe car accident claims — but only if you know how and when to apply it. When the other driver broke a law meant to protect you, Arizona law may already be on your side.
If you suspect the driver who hit you was speeding, texting, or intoxicated, don’t let the burden of proof fall entirely on your shoulders. Let the law speak for itself.
