Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
32 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2025 5 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Mississippi courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Thomas v. McDonaldgreen2 sentences2015To prevail on a negligence per se claim, “a party must prove that he was a member of the class sought to be protected under the statute, that his injuries were of a type sought to be avoided, and that violation of the statute proximately caused his injuries.” Snapp v. Harrison, 699 So.2d 567, 571 (¶ 22) (Miss.1997) (citing Thomas v. McDonald, 667 So.2d 594, 597 (Miss. 1995)). 2015To prevail on a negligence per se claim, “a party must prove that he was a member of the class sought to be protected under the statute, that his injuries were of a type sought to be avoided, and that violation of the statute proximately caused his injuries.” Snapp v. Harrison, 699 So. 2d 567, 571 (¶ 22) (Miss. 1997) (citing Thomas v. McDonald, 667 So. 2d 594, 597 (Miss. 1995)). | 10 | 10 |
Palmer v. Anderson Infirmary Benevolent Ass'ngreen2 sentences2024“Mississippi recognizes the doctrine of negligence per se, which essentially provides that breach of a statute or ordinance may render the offender liable in tort without proof of lack of due care.” Simpson v. Boyd, 880 So. 2d 1047, 1052 (Miss. 2004) (quoting Palmer v. Anderson Infirmary Benevolent Ass’n, 656 So. 2d 790, 796 (Miss. 1995)). 2012"Mississippi recognizes the doctrine of negligence per se, which in essence provides that breach of a statute or ordinance renders the offender liable in tort without proof of a lack of due care.” Palmer v. Anderson Infirmary Benevolent Ass’n, 656 So.2d 790, 796 (Miss.1995). | 6 | 8 |
Snapp v. Harrisongreen2 sentences2015To prevail on a negligence per se claim, “a party must prove that he was a member of the class sought to be protected under the statute, that his injuries were of a type sought to be avoided, and that violation of the statute proximately caused his injuries.” Snapp v. Harrison, 699 So.2d 567, 571 (¶ 22) (Miss.1997) (citing Thomas v. McDonald, 667 So.2d 594, 597 (Miss. 1995)). 2015To prevail on a negligence per se claim, “a party must prove that he was a member of the class sought to be protected under the statute, that his injuries were of a type sought to be avoided, and that violation of the statute proximately caused his injuries.” Snapp v. Harrison, 699 So. 2d 567, 571 (¶ 22) (Miss. 1997) (citing Thomas v. McDonald, 667 So. 2d 594, 597 (Miss. 1995)). | 5 | 6 |
Sharon Boyer v. Tenn Tom Constructorsgreen2 sentences2006Palmer v. Anderson Infirmary Benevolent Ass'n, 656 So.2d 790, 795 (Miss.1995) (citing Boyer v. Tenn. Tom Constructors, 702 F.2d 609, 611 (5th Cir.1983)). 1995They cite Boyer v. Tenn. Tom Constructors, 702 F.2d 609, 611 (1983), a Mississippi diversity case, in which the Fifth Circuit held: Mississippi recognizes the doctrine of negligence per se, which in essence provides that breach of a statute or ordinance renders the offender liable in tort without proof of a lack of due care. | 3 | 3 |
Simpson v. Boydgreen2 sentences2024“Mississippi recognizes the doctrine of negligence per se, which essentially provides that breach of a statute or ordinance may render the offender liable in tort without proof of lack of due care.” Simpson v. Boyd, 880 So. 2d 1047, 1052 (Miss. 2004) (quoting Palmer v. Anderson Infirmary Benevolent Ass’n, 656 So. 2d 790, 796 (Miss. 1995)). 2016“Mississippi recognizes the doctrine of negligence per se, which essentially provides that breach of a statute or ordinance may render the offender liable in tort without proof of lack of due care.” Simpson v. Boyd, 880 So.2d 1047, 1052 (¶ 26) (Miss.2004) (citation omitted). | 2 | 2 |
Detroit Marine Engineering v. McReegreen2 sentences2000Jackson v. Daley, 739 So.2d 1031, 1038 (Miss. 1999); Detroit Marine Engineering v. McRee, 510 So.2d 462, 465 (Miss.1987). 1996Jackson v. Daley, 739 So.2d 1031, 1038 (Miss. 1999); Detroit Marine Engineering v. McRee, 510 So.2d 462, 465 (Miss. 1987). | 2 | 2 |
Jackson v. Daleygreen2 sentences2000Jackson v. Daley, 739 So.2d 1031, 1038 (Miss. 1999); Detroit Marine Engineering v. McRee, 510 So.2d 462, 465 (Miss.1987). 1996Jackson v. Daley, 739 So.2d 1031, 1038 (Miss. 1999); Detroit Marine Engineering v. McRee, 510 So.2d 462, 465 (Miss. 1987). | 2 | 2 |
Wright v. United Statesgreen2 sentences1999See also Wright v. United States, 866 F.Supp. 804, 806 (S.D.N.Y.1994)(considering discretionary function exception to Federal Tort Claims Act, failure to take steps to minimize risks of personal injury where feasible "is negligent and not within the discretionary function exemption....") ¶ 20. 1997See also Wright v. United States, 866 F. Supp. 804, 806 (S.D.N.Y.1994)(considering discretionary function exception to Federal Tort Claims Act, failure to take steps to minimize risks of personal injury where feasible "is negligent and not within the discretionary function exemption....") ¶20. | 2 | 2 |
cluster 543623green2 sentences1999Under Mississippi law, the violation of a city ordinance may become grounds for granting a negligence per se instruction. citing Hill v. London, Stetelman, and Kirkwood, Inc., 906 F.2d 204 (5th Cir.1990). ¶ 6. 1999See Hill v. London, Stetelman & Kirkwood, Inc., 906 F.2d 204, 209 (5th Cir.1990)(under Mississippi law, plaintiffs were entitled to a negligence per se instruction if defendant's failure to install a smoke detector was a violation of the city code, if they were members of the class the ordinance sought to protect and if the harm they suffered was the type the ordinance was intended to prevent). | 2 | 2 |
Donald v. Amoco Production Co.green2 sentences2005Thus, the negligence per se claim was properly dismissed.... 735 So.2d at 177 . 2003Thus, the negligence per se claim was properly dismissed . . . . 735 So. 2d at 177 . | 1 | 5 |
Rong Yao Zhou v. Jennifer Mall Restaurant, Inc.green1 sentence2022As noted by the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A cmt. j. (1965), “[t]he decision to adopt from a statute a standard of care to be applied in determining common law negligence is ‘purely a judicial one, for the court to make.’” McNeil Pharm. v. Hawkins, 686 A.2d 567, 579 (D.C. 1996) (quoting Rong Yao Zhou v. Jennifer Mall Rest., Inc., 534 A.2d 1268, 1274 (D.C. 1987)). | 1 | 1 |
McNeil Pharmaceutical v. Hawkinsgreen1 sentence2022As noted by the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A cmt. j. (1965), “[t]he decision to adopt from a statute a standard of care to be applied in determining common law negligence is ‘purely a judicial one, for the court to make.’” McNeil Pharm. v. Hawkins, 686 A.2d 567, 579 (D.C. 1996) (quoting Rong Yao Zhou v. Jennifer Mall Rest., Inc., 534 A.2d 1268, 1274 (D.C. 1987)). | 1 | 1 |
Helene Benson v. Mack D. Rathergreen1 sentence2022Additionally, “Mississippi recognizes the doctrine of negligence per se, which essentially provides that breach of a statute or ordinance may render the offender liable in tort without proof of lack of due care.” Benson v. Rather, 211 So. 3d 748, 756 (¶29) (Miss. | 1 | 1 |
Brennan v. Webbgreen2 sentences2001Snapp v. Harrison, 699 So.2d 567, 571 (Miss.1997); Brennan v. Webb, 729 So.2d 244, 249 (Miss.Ct.App. 1998). 2001This Court has stated that "negligence per se and subsequent liability arise in certain situations when a statute is violated by one party and this violation proximately causes injury to a party." Brennan v. Webb, 729 So.2d 244, 249 (Miss.Ct.App.1998). | 1 | 1 |
Otto v. Specialties, Inc.green1 sentence1995See Otto v. Specialties, Inc., 386 F. Supp. 1240 (N.D.Miss. 1974); Haver v. Hinson, 385 So.2d 605 (Miss. 1980); Miss. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Haver v. Hinson
green
2 sentences1995Haver, 385 So.2d at 608 ; U-Haul Co., 232 So.2d at 708 . 1995See Otto v. Specialties, Inc., 386 F. Supp. 1240 (N.D.Miss. 1974); Haver v. Hinson, 385 So.2d 605 (Miss. 1980); Miss. | 2 | 1995–1995 |
Dooley v. Byrd
green
1 sentence2025A party who asserts a negligence-per-se claim, however, must demonstrate “(1) that the party belongs to the class of people the statute intends to protect, (2) that the party suffered the type injuries the statute was designed to avoid, and (3) that the offender’s violation of the statute proximately caused the party’s injuries.” Id. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Town of Bolton v. Chevron Oil Co.
green
2 sentences2021The Baucums argued that the negligence per se claim 9 Town of Bolton v. Chevron Oil Co., 919 So. 2d 1101 (Miss. 2021The Baucums argued that the negligence per se claim 9 Town of Bolton v. Chevron Oil Co., 919 So. 2d 1101 (Miss. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
U-Haul Company v. White
green
1 sentence1995Haver, 385 So.2d at 608 ; U-Haul Co., 232 So.2d at 708 . | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Long v. Sledge
green
1 sentence1994It is interesting to note that the court quotes the doctor as saying "that it was a general practice to count sponges during an operation but it was not a practice to count the clamps." Id. at 818 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.