Also known as:evidence of habit · habitual evidence · habit · routine practice
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Evidence consisting of a person's or organization's regular practice of meeting a particular kind of situation with a specific type of conduct. Such evidence may be admitted to prove that on a particular occasion the person or organization acted in accordance with the habit or routine practice.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
6
Seatbelt Habit in Negligence Suit
Harold Hunt sues after a collision and offers proof that the defendant always fastens her seatbelt before driving. The evidence shows the defendant followed this specific repeated response to the situation of starting a car on many prior occasions. The court admits the evidence to prove she fastened her seatbelt on the day of the accident.
Lunch Return Routine at Office
Hilda Hernandez claims she was at her desk during a critical meeting. She offers evidence that she always returns from lunch between 12:50 and 1:00 p.m. The proof establishes a regular practice of responding to the end of her lunch break in that precise manner on numerous occasions. The court receives the evidence to show she followed the routine on the day in question.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Federal Rules
Restatements
Casebooks
Course Outlines
Study Supplements
Dictionaries
Henry Harrison is injured when another driver changes lanes without warning. He introduces testimony that the driver invariably signals before changing lanes. The evidence demonstrates a semi-automatic response to the situation of preparing to move into another lane on repeated prior occasions. The court allows the evidence to prove the driver signaled on the day of the collision.
Office Return Habit in Alibi
Harriet Hamilton faces charges and offers proof she always returns to her office from lunch at the same time. The evidence shows this specific repeated response to the end of her lunch break on many occasions. The court admits the evidence to support her claim she was at her desk during the charged events.
Stair Climbing Routine at Building
Hannah Hughes slips on stairs and sues the building owner. She offers evidence that the owner always takes the stairs two at a time when descending. The proof establishes a regular practice of responding to the situation of using those stairs in that manner on numerous prior occasions. The court receives the evidence to prove the owner followed the habit on the day of the fall.
Daily Patrol by Site Dog
Hana Hashimoto is bitten by a dog that escaped a construction site. She offers evidence that the supervisor always brought the dog to patrol the perimeter after hours. The evidence demonstrates a routine practice of responding to the end of the workday by releasing the dog in that location on repeated occasions. The court admits the evidence to prove the supervisor followed the habit on the evening of the bite.
Common questions
Frequently Asked
4
How does habit evidence differ from character evidence?+
Habit evidence shows a specific repeated response to a particular situation. Character evidence describes a general trait such as cautiousness. Habit evidence carries greater probative value because it is more specific and less volitional than character evidence.
Supporting sources
Must habit evidence be corroborated or supported by an eyewitness to be admitted?+
No. The rule permits admission of habit evidence regardless of whether it is corroborated or whether there was an eyewitness.
Supporting sources
Can a single prior act establish a habit?+
No. Habit requires a showing that the person consistently acts in a particular way on many occasions. One prior experience is not sufficient.
Supporting sources
Why is habit evidence considered more reliable than character evidence?+
Habit describes particular behavior in a specific setting and is regular if not invariable. It therefore has greater probative value in proving conduct on a particular occasion and carries less risk of unfair prejudice.
Supporting sources
386 U.S. 18, 87 S. Ct. 824, 17 L. Ed. 2d 705 (1967)Criminal Procedure
…fit to avail themselves of that opportunity. ..... "Now whether or not Mr. Teale had any other money at the time or was in the habit of concealing his money in different departments, I don't know, and ladies and gentlemen, you don't know, because you have not had any testimony from that witness stand, and the only person…