A breach of a duty imposed by statute, ordinance, or administrative rule shall not be considered negligence per se, but may be considered by the trier of fact as evidence of negligence; however, any breach of duty as provided by statute, ordinance, or administrative rule relating to: (1) Electrical fire safety, (2) the use of smoke alarms, (3) sterilization of needles and instruments used by persons engaged in the practice of body art, body piercing, tattooing, or electrology, or other precaution against the spread of disease, as required under RCW 70.54.350, or (4) driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug, shall be considered negligence per se.
RCW 5.40.050
Breach of duty—Evidence of negligence—Negligence per se.
Applied in 69 court decisions — leading case 118 Wash. 2d 476 - Hansen v. Friend (1992)
Most recently applied in 196 Wash. 2d 111 - Gerlach v. The Cove Apartments, LLC (August 2020)
2009 c 412 s 20; 2001 c 194 s 5; 1986 c 305 s 901.
How often courts cite this section
Court decisions citing this, by year. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.
Official source: Washington State Legislature. Reproduced from public-domain Washington statutes; confirm against the official source for the current text. Not legal advice.