context: Where a statutory provision does not define a standard of care but merely imposes an administrative requirement, such as the requirement to obtain a license or to file a report to support a regulatory scheme, violation of such requirement will not support a negligence per se claim. Even if the regulatory scheme as a whole is designed to protect the public or to promote safety, the licensing duty itself is not a standard of care, but an administrative requirement.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.parenthetical: observing that "[i]n a majority of accident cases, the violation of a licensing statute by a driver is not held relevant to the determination of fault"
citation_a.sentence: See Ridge v. Cessna Aircraft Co., 117 F.3d 126, 131 (4th Cir.1997) (holding that federal regulations making a pilot responsible for operation of his aircraft and requiring- him, upon request, to submit a written report to the government whenever he deviates from an aviation rule in an emergency provide for “general standards of conduct,” but do “not impose a particular duty,” and thus their violation was not negligence per se in Virginia); see also Duncan v. Hixon, 223 Va. 373, 288 S.E.2d 494, 495 (1982) (observing that “[i]n a majority of accident cases, the violation of a licensing statute by a driver is not held relevant to the determination of fault”).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 117 F.3d 126, 131
citation_b.parenthetical: holding that federal regulations making a pilot responsible for operation of his aircraft and requiring- him, upon request, to submit a written report to the government whenever he deviates from an aviation rule in an emergency provide for "general standards of conduct," but do "not impose a particular duty," and thus their violation was not negligence per se in Virginia
citation_b.sentence: See Ridge v. Cessna Aircraft Co., 117 F.3d 126, 131 (4th Cir.1997) (holding that federal regulations making a pilot responsible for operation of his aircraft and requiring- him, upon request, to submit a written report to the government whenever he deviates from an aviation rule in an emergency provide for “general standards of conduct,” but do “not impose a particular duty,” and thus their violation was not negligence per se in Virginia); see also Duncan v. Hixon, 223 Va. 373, 288 S.E.2d 494, 495 (1982) (observing that “[i]n a majority of accident cases, the violation of a licensing statute by a driver is not held relevant to the determination of fault”).