Also known as: deviate · deviates · deviated · deviation doctrine
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
A substantial departure from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation. When the departure creates a high risk of death or serious bodily harm and reflects conscious disregard or a failure to perceive the risk, it establishes recklessness or criminal negligence.
A substantial departure from the standard of care that a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation. When the departure creates a high risk of death or serious bodily harm and reflects conscious disregard or a failure to perceive the risk, it establishes recklessness or criminal negligence.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A court's modification of a trust's administrative or dispositive provisions when circumstances not anticipated by the settlor arise and the change will further the trust's purposes.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A court's modification of a trust's administrative or dispositive provisions when circumstances not anticipated by the settlor arise and the change will further the trust's purposes.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
Darrell Duncan speeds through a residential neighborhood at night while heavily intoxicated and fails to stop at multiple intersections. His conduct constitutes a gross deviation from the care a reasonable driver would exercise. When he strikes and kills a pedestrian, the killing qualifies as involuntary manslaughter under the common-law standard for criminal negligence.
Diana Delgado stores volatile chemicals in an unventilated shed despite knowing the high risk of explosion. She consciously disregards the substantial and unjustifiable danger to neighbors. The resulting blast kills a passerby and meets the Model Penal Code definition of recklessness through gross deviation from law-abiding conduct.
Diego Duarte leaves a loaded handgun on a kitchen table in a home with young children present. The level of carelessness exceeds ordinary civil negligence and amounts to a substantially greater deviation from reasonable conduct. When a child discharges the weapon and kills a playmate, the death constitutes involuntary manslaughter.
Deanna Davenport inspects a warehouse roof but overlooks obvious signs of collapse that a reasonable inspector would notice. Her failure to perceive the substantial risk constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care. When the roof falls and kills a worker, the homicide satisfies the Model Penal Code definition of criminal negligence.
Dorothy Daniels sets fire to an occupied apartment building to collect insurance proceeds. The act manifests extreme indifference to human life through reckless conduct. The resulting deaths are treated as murder under the Model Penal Code presumption for arson.
Criminal negligence demands a substantially greater departure from reasonable conduct than the deviation that supports civil liability. The higher threshold ensures that only serious lapses resulting in death qualify as involuntary manslaughter.
Supporting sources
Involuntary manslaughter requires a gross deviation creating a high risk of death or serious harm. Depraved-heart murder demands a higher degree of recklessness and indifference to an unjustifiably high risk to human life.
Supporting sources
Recklessness exists when a person consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk and the disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard a law-abiding person would observe. The nature, degree, and circumstances known to the actor determine whether the deviation meets this test.
Supporting sources
Daphne Doyle creates a trust leaving an outright remainder to her disabled grandson. After her death, medical costs threaten to exhaust the corpus before the grandson can benefit. A court authorizes conversion of the remainder into a special-needs trust because unanticipated expenses would otherwise defeat the settlor's purpose.
Under the Uniform Trust Code formulation, a court may modify either administrative or dispositive provisions when unanticipated circumstances would otherwise defeat the trust's purposes. Modification is permitted only if it furthers the settlor's intent.
Supporting sources
…the benefit of its members.[^maj-22] Cf. Gibson v. Berryhill , 411 U. S. 564, 578-579 (1973). The State Bar, by providing that deviation from County Bar minimum fees may lead to disciplinary action, has voluntarily joined in what is essentially a private anticompetitive activity, and in that posture cannot claim it is beyond…