The current law in North Carolina is that evidence of failing to wear a seatbelt is inadmissible in any civil trial in NC. NCGS § 20-135.2A(d). 

As such, in NC, you can’t argue that a plaintiff was contributory negligent or that a plaintiff failed to mitigate damages for failing to buckle-up. See, Hagwood v. Odom. In short, in NC, you can’t say one word about seatbelt nonuse to the jury.

Surprised?  Not yet?  Then here are some examples that are close to fact patterns that happen regularly in NC.

Example 1.  A rollover crash causes two unbelted front seat occupants to be ejected from the car and seriously injured.  The occupants later sue the vehicle manufacturer.  The manufacturer is prohibited from arguing or even telling the jury that the occupants were not wearing their seatbelts.

Example 2.  Plaintiff, unbelted, is rear-ended and suffers a chest fracture when her chest impacts the steering wheel.  It’s undisputed that if plaintiff had her seatbelt on then no part of her body would’ve even touched the steering wheel.  Nonetheless, plaintiff sues for all of her injuries and the defendant can’t introduce any evidence that plaintiff wasn’t wearing her seatbelt.

Top 7 Reasons Seatbelt Nonuse Should be Admissible in NC Civil Cases:

1.  It’s the law.

In NC for front and back seat passengers.  I’m not advocating that the police start giving out tickets to back seat passengers but if any occupants are hurt and sue then they should expect that their nonuse may be an issue in a civil lawsuit.

2.   It’s not a secret.

“Click it or Ticket” turned 20 years old in 2013. 

3.   Seatbelt use has increased.

Check out these statistics from the US Department of Transportation.

4.  Seatbelts save lives and prevent injuries.

They would also reduce lawsuits for the folks that choose not to wear them. 

5.   Other similar evidence is admissible.

NC civil defendants can introduce evidence of a plaintiff’s drinking, texting, speeding or just about any other traffic violation in order to defend themselves.  Even crimes that occurred 10 years ago can come into evidence, so why not seatbelt nonuse?

6.  NC’s law is old and outdated.

1985 is when NC lawmakers decided that the ‘seatbelt defense’ was inadmissible.  Here are some other things that happened in ’85:

• The Compact Disc was released to the American consumer
• New Coke came and went
• Microsoft introduced its first version of Windows
• “We are the World” was recorded.  (click here, you won’t regret it)

7.  Let the jury decide.

Generally, a violation of a safety statute (e.g., speeding) is negligence per se.  That means if a plaintiff or defendant was speeding and that speeding was a cause of the accident then a defendant was negligent or plaintiff contributory negligent as a matter of law. 

One argument that I’ve heard against allowing the admissibility of nonuse is that the ‘seatbelt defense’ will automatically mean that a plaintiff is contributory negligent — barred from recovery under NC law — and that is just ”too harsh.” 

I don’t necessarily agree that the ‘seatbelt defense’ would be too harsh for all cases, but I’d be willing to compromise if it meant a change in the current law.  So how about a middle ground?  Here’s one: why not let the jury hear about the nonuse?  That way the jury can then decide whether it’s important or not for each specific case rather than the current one-size-fits-all blanket inadmissibility.  It seems to me if we let a jury decide then that strikes a balance, promotes personal responsibility and avoids hamstringing civil defendants.