Louisiana Private Investigator Licensing Practice Exam

Under Louisiana law, failure to wear what cannot be used to show comparative negligence?

1. Helmet

2. Seatbelt

3. Shoes

4. Safety goggles

The correct answer is: Seatbelt

In Louisiana, comparative negligence refers to the reduction of damages a plaintiff can recover in a personal injury case based on their own fault in causing the injury. However, specific laws are established regarding what actions or omissions may influence a negligence claim. The failure to wear a seatbelt cannot be used to demonstrate comparative negligence in Louisiana. This legal principle is based on the idea that wearing a seatbelt is a statutory requirement intended for public safety, but not complying with this statute post-accident does not imply the injured party was at fault for the accident itself. In other words, the law recognizes that the decision to wear a seatbelt does not affect liability for the accident, which distinctly separates the action from the concept of negligence in the context of the incident. On the other hand, failure to wear a helmet, shoes, or safety goggles could potentially be considered as contributing to an injury in particular contexts, as they are perceived as protective gear relevant to specific activities. This means that when assessing fault or comparative negligence, these failures could be weighed against the injured party's actions. The distinction specifically highlights Louisiana's legislative intent regarding seatbelt laws, emphasizing that the protective actions expected generally should not detract from the primary fault attributed to a party in an accident.