The Seat Belt Defense – California Seatbelt Law
Mar 21st, 2009 by Legal Staff
Section 27315 of the California Vehicle Code requires that all persons 16 years of age or older be “properly restrained by a safety belt” when riding in a motor vehicle. The law was passed by the Legislature based on its findings that a mandatory seatbelt law would contribute to reducing highway deaths and injuries by encouraging greater use of seatbelts.
Suppose you’re in a car stopped for a red light when the vehicle behind you fails to see the light is red and plows into the back of your car at a high rate of speed. Because you are not wearing your seatbelt, you are thrown violently around in the car and suffer critical injuries. Had you been wearing your seatbelt, your injuries would have been relatively minor. Can the driver who hit you bring up the fact that you should have been wearing your seatbelt as the law requires and that he or she should therefore only be responsible (“liable”) for those injuries you would have suffered had you been wearing your seatbelt?
Yes. If the case goes to trial, the jury may be informed of the existence of the law (a “statute”) and may use that knowledge to assist it in determining the reasonableness of driving without a seatbelt. The jury may be given an instruction by the judge upon the criminal statute even when the statute itself does not establish a presumption of negligence under the doctrine of “negligence per se,” that is, it is not automatically wrongful conduct but rather just another factor to be considered by the jury to help it determine whether the injured party acted unreasonably under the circumstances in failing to use a seatbelt.
The bill that ultimately became section 27315 of the Vehicle Code stated that the usage of seat belts offered the “simplest, quickest, and least expensive method of reducing traffic accident casualties” in California. The bill stated that, although seatbelts had been proven effective in virtually all types of traffic collisions, only 17 percent of vehicle occupants voluntarily used them. If the law were enforced, according to the bill, the mandatory seat belt usage law would increase seatbelt usage to 60 percent, thereby considerably reducing accident casualties.
Courts in civil automobile accidents have held that permitting the jury to be instructed on the criminal seatbelt statute helps to educate and convince the parties to the case, the jury, the spectators, and those who hear about the case on television or read about it in the newspaper of the value of seatbelts in preventing serious injuries. Those courts state that it emphasizes the value of seatbelts in preventing serious injuries by warning that a jury may reduce an injured party’s recovery for injuries that would have been avoided by using a seatbelt.
When a person is injured and was not wearing his or her seatbelt, the party at fault has the burden of proving what injuries the victim would have suffered if he or she had been wearing a seat belt as required by law.
