The driver of a Structural Metals truck attempted to pass
a car within 100 feet of an intersection and there was a collision
injuring and killing several people. Impson sued for negligence.
There was a Statute saying that passing a car within 100
feet of an intersection is a traffic violation.
The Trial Court found that the driver was involved in a
traffic violation, therefore, negligence was established as a
matter of law.
Structural Metals appealed, saying that negligence
was not a matter of law based solely on whether the driver broke a traffic
law, but needed to be submitted to a jury.
The Appellate Court agreed that Structural Metals can only
be found liable for negligent as a matter of fact.
Restatement of Torts §288A states that an excused
violation of a legislative enactment is not negligence.
Basically, if you violate a law, but there is some
mitigating circumstance, you can still be found guilty of violating the
law, but you aren't necessarily negligent.
Therefore, it's for a jury to decide if there were
excuses or mitigating circumstances. Negligence can't be decided
as a matter of law.
However, in this case, no evidence was presented at trial
that there were mitigating circumstances or legally acceptable excuses,
so Structural Metals was out of luck.
