DeJesus v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad

One night, as Pedro Nieves DeJesus (plaintiff) was driving with his wife (plaintiff), his car hit a tanker car on a train that was blocking a public highway. DeJesus was driving late at night and had no warning that the train was temporarily parked across the road. It was dark outside, the tanker car was black and unlit, and the crossing had no lights. DeJesus and his wife sued Seaboard Coast Line Railroad (Seaboard) (defendant) for negligence. The jury was instructed that the railroad had violated a statute requiring that if a train stopped and blocked a public road between 30 minutes after sunset and 30 minutes before sunrise, the train’s crew was required to place some sort of visual warning on both sides of a railroad crossing to alert approaching motorists unless the crossing had automatic warning signals or adequate lighting. The trial judge provided an instruction to the jury, stating that if the jury determined that Seaboard had violated the statute, this violation constituted negligence. Seaboard’s defense was based on DeJesus’s alleged contributory negligence. The jury found in favor of DeJesus and his wife. Seaboard appealed, and a district court reversed, finding that it was wrong to give the instruction on negligence per se. The district court also certified a poorly worded question to the Florida Supreme Court. The supreme court could not answer the question as framed but answered as appropriate by stating that violations of statutes that did not impose strict liability may constitute negligence per se or may constitute mere evidence of negligence.