Page 1

Car Accident Attorney | Best Auto Accident Lawyer – Galewski The Tampa Supreme Court has granted review of a case concerning the admissibility of the non-use of seatbelts in a trial of a vehicle accident case.

The case involved an accident wherein the driver and passengers were severely injured a collision with a semi-truck. The driver and passengers weren't wearing seatbelts. The trial court ruled that the plaintiff’s non-use of the seatbelts was admissible in evidence. Unsurprisingly, the injured plaintiffs lost the case when the jury found that the plaintiff’s negligence for not wearing seat belts overcame the negligence of the truck driver in causing the accident. On appeal, the other Court of Appeals overturned the trial court's ruling and held that the Plaintiff’s non-use of a seatbelt shouldn't have been admitted into the trial. Further appeal was taken to the Tampa Supreme Court, where the lawyers have just finished filing briefs. Given the history of the law in this area, Personal Injury


Attorney Tampa FL, both on the plaintiff's side and the defense; eagerly await the Court's decision. In the year 1985, Tampa passed a bylaws mandating the use of seatbelts while operating or occupying a vehicle. Before the passage of that statute, the common law in Tampa was that the non-use of a seatbelt isn't admissible in a trial civil for personal injuries resulting from an automobile Accident Attorney Tampa FL. The rationale behind the common law was that the non-use of a seatbelt isn't relevant to the main cause of the accident. Put simply, an automobile accident is caused by the negligent operation of a motorized vehicle and not by the non-use of seatbelts. When the seatbelt statute was first passed, the Tampa legislature tipped their hat to the common law rule. The statute actually had an express provision that stated the use or non-use of a seatbelt wasn't admissible in a trial civil. With the passage of House Bill 4, that section was abrogated by the statute. The Tampa Supreme Court is now faced with deciding what legal effect did the repeal of that section have on the long standing common law. Does the repeal of that section mean that the non-use seatbelts is now admissible or does it mean that the problem is left for the Tampa courts and common law to decide? In case the legislature intended for seatbelt evidence to be admissible in a trial civil, then why did it not simply change the statute to expressly provide that the non-use of a seatbelt be admissible as opposed to just remain quiet on the issue? It'll also be intriguing to see how a Court deals with the distinction between negligence that contributes to the main cause of the Car accident and negligence that contributes to the main cause of the injury.

Profile for galewski

Car Accident Attorney | Best Auto Accident Lawyer – Galewski  

The Tampa Supreme Court has granted review of a case concerning the admissibility of the non-use of seatbelts in a trial of a vehicle accide...

Car Accident Attorney | Best Auto Accident Lawyer – Galewski  

The Tampa Supreme Court has granted review of a case concerning the admissibility of the non-use of seatbelts in a trial of a vehicle accide...

Advertisement