Four Elements on Negligence to Prove a Car Accident Claim

In Maryland and every other state, financial liability for auto accident injuries hinges on negligence. If you want to hold someone responsible for an accident, you must show that they committed the tort of negligence.

Four Elements of Negligence

To bring a personal injury claim on negligence, you must prove the four elements of negligence:

1. the defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff
2. the defendant breached that duty,
3. plaintiff suffered actual injury or loss, and
4. defendant’s breach was the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injury

Duty

The first element of negligence requires that the defendant owed some duty or obligation to the plaintiff under the circumstances. In Maryland, duty is an obligation recognized and enforced by the law to adhere to a specific standard of behavior towards others. It represents the total considerations of policy that prompt the law to affirm that the plaintiff deserves protection.

Maryland law does not provide a universal test for recognizing a tort duty. A tort duty might not align with a moral obligation, nor does it automatically arise from statutory or contractual duties. The Maryland Supreme Court considers two primary factors when determining whether to recognize a tort duty in specific cases: the potential harm likely to arise from failing to exercise due care and the relationship between the involved parties.

The emphasis on these considerations varies depending on the nature of the risk involved. If the risk involves only economic loss, a close relationship between the parties is generally required to establish tort liability. Conversely, if there is a risk of personal injury, the critical factor in determining duty is the foreseeability of the harm.

We never argue about duy in an auto accident lawsuit – this element is virtually automatic. There is no foreseeability of the harm issues. Whenever you get behind the wheel and drive on public roads, you must drive safely and follow the traffic rules to avoid injuring other drivers. So all drivers must reasonably protect other drivers on the road while operating a vehicle.

Breach

The 2^nd element of negligence requires a showing that the defendant breached the duty owed to the plaintiff. This is always the most critical element in auto accident cases. In a car accident, breach becomes an issue when one party fails to adhere to the standards of care expected of a reasonable driver. This could involve speeding, failing to obey traffic signals, driving under the influence, or not following safe driving practices given the road conditions. The breach is established by showing that the driver’s conduct deviated from what a reasonably prudent driver would have done under similar circumstances, directly leading to the accident and resulting damages.

This element is almost always established by showing that the defendant violated a traffic law by failing to yield, failing to stop for a red light, etc. These Rules of the Road are outlined in Chapter 21 of the Transportation Article of the Maryland Code. Failure to obey the traffic rules is a breach of the defendant’sduty to drive safely and avoid harm to others.

But keep in mind the breach of duty element can be established even without violating any traffic laws. A defendant can breach their duty if they fail to operate their vehicle safely and avoid accidents that a reasonable person would avoid. This is the critical issue our attorneys face in a car accident lawsuit: whether the defendant driver violated this reasonable person standard. The determination as to whether the defendant has breached this rule is usually resolved by the jury (or, in smaller cases, a judge).

Injury

The 3^rd element of negligence requires that the plaintiff have an actual physical injury related to what happened. If the plaintiff is not actually injured, there is no tort of negligence. For example, llet’ssay Driver A pulls out in front of Driver B. Luckily, Driver B is somehow able to swerve out of the way and just barely avoid a collision with a Mack truck. Driver A clearly breached his duty, so elements 1 and 2 are present. But Driver A was not hurt, so element three cannot be established.

Keep in mind that the pplaintiff’sinjuries must be physical. Emotional distress from almost getting into a deadly accident is not enough to bring a negligence claim. A plaintiff can get additional damages for emotional distress if it is related to physical pain and injuries.

Causation

The 4^th and final element of negligence is causation. This requires the plaintiff to show that the physical injuries he has were actually caused by the car accident (and not some pre-existing condition). This element is often a battleground in auto accident cases, particularly those involving back and neck injuries.

Maryland courts use two methods to determine if a ddefendant’snegligence actually caused an injury: the ““ut for””test and the ““ubstantial factor””test.

The ““ut for””test is used when the injury would not have occurred without the ddefendant’snegligent action. The ““ubstantial factor””test is employed when the injury results from two or more independent acts of negligence. Under this test, a ddefendant’sactions are considered the cause-in-fact of the injury if they significantly contributed to the harm.

Additionally, legal causation assesses whether it is fair or appropriate, based on social policy, to hold a defendant legally accountable for the effects of their actions or inactions. This often depends on whether the harm to the plaintiff was foreseeable.

Example of Four Elements of Negligence in Auto Accident Cases

Let’s take a common example to illustrate how causation defenses usually play out. Driver A rear-ends Driver B (a clear breach of duty). Driver B claims that the accident caused a herniated disc injury in his back. However, the medical evidence proves that Driver B had gotten the herniated disc years before the accident, and it was not reaggravated. This means that Driver B’s herniated disc was not caused by Driver A’ negligent driving. There is no causation, so negligence is not established.

The fact that the plaintiff’s disc injury is pre-existing does not necessarily prevent them from establishing causation. If they can show that the injury was made worse or reaggravated by the accident, then the proximate cause element of negligence would be satisfied.

Getting an Experienced Lawyer on Your Side

If you have been harmed or lost a loved one in a personal injury case, you need the best possible lawyer on your side to prove these four elements of negligence. So do your research. Find out who the best personal injury lawyers in Maryland are and decide who you want to fight for you. If that search leads you to Miller & Zois, call us immediately at 800-885-8082. You can also get a free online consultation.