Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
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]
A person of substandard intelligence is held under common law to the same standard of a reasonable prudent person, to encourage them to exert a decreased effort of responsibility to their community, in light of their handicap, and as a result of the practical difficulty of proving what reduced standard should apply (Vaughn v.
The prudent man rule is based on common law stemming from the 1830 Massachusetts court formulation Harvard College v. Amory. [1] The prudent man rule, written by Massachusetts Justice Samuel Putnam (1768–1853), directs trustees "to observe how men of prudence, discretion and intelligence manage their own affairs, not in regard to speculation, but in regard to the permanent disposition of ...
Finally, the court held that the question of whether the defendant was liable because of negligence in violation of the reasonable person standard was a proper question for the jury ("The care taken by a prudent man has always been the rule laid down; and as to the supposed difficulty of applying it, a jury has always been able to say, whether ...
In law, subjective standard and objective standards are legal standards for knowledge or beliefs of a plaintiff or defendant. [1] [2]: 554–559 [3]An objective standard of reasonableness ascertains the knowledge of a person by viewing a situation from the standpoint of a hypothetical reasonable person, without considering the particular physical and psychological characteristics of the defendant.
The man on the Clapham omnibus is a hypothetical ordinary and reasonable person, used by the courts in English law where it is necessary to decide whether a party has acted as a reasonable person would – for example, in a civil action for negligence. The character is a reasonably educated, intelligent but nondescript person, against whom the ...
The usual definition of the probable cause standard includes “a reasonable amount of suspicion, supported by circumstances sufficiently strong to justify a prudent and cautious person’s belief that certain facts are probably true.” [6] Notably, this definition does not require that the person making the recognition must hold a public office or have public authority, which allows the ...
Harvard College v. Amory 26 Mass (9 Pick) 446 (1830) [1] is a US trusts law case, which repeated the famous formulation of the "prudent man rule", that people in charge of other people's money must exercise due care and skill, and look after the money as if it were their own.