Also known as:with due caution and circumspection · due care
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A standard of care requiring a person to exercise the prudence and attentiveness that a reasonably careful individual would employ under the circumstances. The standard incorporates both what a person of ordinary experience and intelligence would know and what that person would discover by using due care in performing assigned duties.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
6
Agent Selects Insecure Code Library
ByteWave hired Leo to design a mobile app and select third-party code. Leo chose an open-source library notorious in the industry for security flaws but performed no investigation. The library was exploited, causing a data breach. ByteWave sued Leo for breaching the duty of care. The court measured Leo's conduct against the standard of due caution and circumspection required of an agent with claimed expertise and held him liable for failing to discover information a careful professional would have found.
Manufacturer Sells Defective Product
A manufacturer produced a ladder with a latent structural weakness and sold it through retailers. A consumer who bought the ladder from a store used it and suffered serious injury when a rung collapsed. The consumer sued the manufacturer in negligence. The court applied the standard of due caution and circumspection and held that the manufacturer owed a duty to foreseeable users even without privity of contract.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cases
Statutes
Uniform Acts
Restatements
Casebooks
Officer Executes Defective Warrant
Officers obtained a warrant that failed to describe the items to be seized. They executed the warrant at the Ramirez home and seized evidence. Ramirez moved to suppress. The court held that a reasonable officer would have recognized the particularity defect and that executing the warrant without due caution and circumspection violated the Fourth Amendment.
Groh v. Ramirez540 U.S. 551 (2004)
High-Speed Police Chase Ends in Death
Deputies pursued a motorcycle at high speed through residential streets. The motorcycle crashed, killing the passenger. The passenger's estate sued the county under the Due Process Clause. The court ruled that the deputies' conduct, even if reckless, did not shock the conscience and therefore did not violate due process because it lacked the deliberate indifference required beyond ordinary lack of due caution and circumspection.
County of Sacramento v. Lewis523 U.S. 833 (1998)
Jail Pillow Left on Stairs
A deputy left a pillow on a jail stairway. An inmate tripped on the pillow and was injured. The inmate sued the deputy under the Due Process Clause. The court held that the deputy's mere negligence did not constitute a constitutional deprivation because due process requires more than the absence of due caution and circumspection.
Daniels v. Williams474 U.S. 327 (1986)
Police Rely on Invalid Warrant Record
Officers arrested Herring based on a warrant record that had been recalled but not updated in the database. They searched his vehicle and found a gun. Herring moved to suppress the evidence. The court held that the officers acted without due caution and circumspection in relying on the outdated record but that the exclusionary rule did not apply because the error was isolated and not reckless.
Herring v. United States555 U.S. 135 (2009)
Common questions
Frequently Asked
3
How does the standard of due caution and circumspection differ from ordinary negligence in criminal law?+
In involuntary manslaughter prosecutions the government must prove the defendant acted without due caution and circumspection when performing a lawful act that caused death. This standard requires more than ordinary civil negligence and is satisfied when the defendant fails to exercise the care a reasonably prudent person would use under the circumstances.
Supporting sources
Does an agent satisfy the duty of care by relying only on information the principal supplies?+
No. An agent must know what a person of ordinary experience and intelligence would know and must discover additional facts that due care in performing the assignment would reveal. Relying solely on the principal's statements does not discharge that obligation.
Supporting sources
Can a director avoid personal liability for an unlawful distribution by claiming lack of actual knowledge?+
No. Directors are liable when they assent to an unlawful distribution without exercising due care. The standard includes information the director would have obtained by using due caution and circumspection in reviewing available financial data.
Supporting sources
474 U.S. 327 (1986)Constitutional Law
…intent of the Constitution”). Upon reflection, we agree and overrule Parratt to the extent that it states that mere lack of due care by a state official may “deprive” an individual of life, liberty, or property under the Fourteenth Amendment. The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment provides: “[N]or shall any…
Business Associations RelationshipsLiability rules related to business associations · Liability of corporate officers and directors under the Model Business Corporation Act (2016)NEXTGENIntermediate