P bought poison in D's drug store. D's clerk failed to label the poison as required by statute.
P drank the poison and died. P's estate sued D in negligence.
Procedural History:
Trial court found for P.
MN Supreme Court affirmed, found for P.
Issues:
When can violation of a statute be used in civil litigation to establish negligence per se?
Holding/Rule:
If a statute imposes upon any person a specific duty for the protection or benefit of others, and a person neglects to perform that duty, he is liable to those for whose protection or benefit it was imposed for any injuries of the character which the statute was designed to protect that proximately arise from that neglect.
Reasoning:
Violation of a statute established negligence per se.
It is immaterial whether the duty is imposed by statute or common law, however.
The only difference would be the way that a court determines if the standard of care has been violated.
