Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In constitutional and administrative law, reasonableness is a lens through which courts examine the constitutionality or lawfulness of legislation and regulation. [ 12 ] [ 13 ] [ 14 ] According to Paul Craig , it is "concerned with review of the weight and balance accorded by the primary decision-maker to factors that have been or can be deemed ...
Administrators must be diligent in observing the reasonability rule when enforcing policy. Is it reasonable to conclude, by using Wikipedia policies, that a particular article should be deleted? Is a particular username a reasonable one for an editor to have, or is it inappropriate for this venue? Is a particular action against a particularly ...
Reasonable people with good intentions can still disagree over matters of substance. This is a concept that many people don't understand. Indeed, this is a concept that many people don't want to understand. It is comforting to think that those who disagree with us do so because they are unreasonable and possibly evil.
Reasonable doubt, a legal standard of proof in most adversarial criminal systems; Reasonable person, a person who exercises care, skill, and appropriate judgment Reasonableness, the quality of a government action that is reasonable; Subjective and objective standard of reasonableness, legal standards of reasonableness
That would still change the essay from being solely about the Reasonability Rule to a broader "how and why to be reasonable" treatise.-- Father Goose ( talk ) 03:05, 12 July 2008 (UTC) [ reply ] "Consensus vs. policy" and reasonableness
Accountability for reasonableness is an ethical framework that describes the conditions of a fair decision-making process. It focuses on how decisions should be made and why these decisions are ethical. It was developed by Norman Daniels and James Sabin and is often applied in health policy and bioethics. [1]
In law, a reasonable person, reasonable man, sometimes referred to situationally, [1] is a hypothetical person whose character and care conduct, under any common set of facts, is decided through reasoning of good practice or policy. [2] [3] It is a legal fiction [4] crafted by the courts and communicated through case law and jury instructions. [5]
Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court determined that an objective reasonableness standard should apply to a civilian's claim that law enforcement officials used excessive force in the course of making an arrest, investigatory stop, or other "seizure" of his or her person.