Elements of Nevada's Theories of Liability

Negligence Per Se

Negligence Per Se

“Negligence per se, however, is not a distinct cause of action; it is a negligence claim based on violation of a standard of care set out by statute or rule.”

Gattman v. Favro, 306 Or. 11, 15 n. 3, 757 P.2d 402 (1988).

Elements

The court may adopt as the standard of conduct of a reasonable man the requirements of a legislative enactment or an administrative regulation whose purpose is found to be exclusively or in part

  • to protect a class of persons which includes the one whose interest is invaded, and
  • to protect the particular interest which is invaded, and
  • to protect that interest against the kind of harm which has resulted, and
  • to protect that interest against the particular hazard from which the harm results.

Sagebrush Ltd. v. Carson City, 99 Nev. 204, 207, 660 P.2d 1013, 1015 (Nev.,1983)(quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 286).

Example Cases

  • The plain and unambiguous language of NRS 455.010 is intended to protect members of the public from falling into excavations. In this case, Atkinson entered a construction site and fell into an excavation pit. Atkinson is within the class of persons that the statute was designed to protect, and her injury is of the type the statute was intended to prevent.
    Atkinson v. MGM Grand Hotel, Inc., 98 P.3d 678, 680 (Nev. 2004)

Proof

Damages

Defenses

Misc