Also known as: negligence standards · standard of care · reasonable person standard
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
An objective benchmark of conduct measured by the care a reasonable person would exercise under the circumstances.
A gross deviation from the reasonable-person benchmark that creates a substantial and unjustifiable risk of death or serious harm.
An objective benchmark of conduct measured by the care a reasonable person would exercise under the circumstances.
Fifteen-year-old Nina Nielsen drove a forklift at her family's warehouse to move pallets during a busy shift. The forklift struck Nathaniel Newman and caused serious injury. Courts applying the modern trend hold the minor to an adult standard of care because operating heavy machinery is an adult activity.
Nexus Technologies received repeated complaints that a shift supervisor was harassing Nina Nielsen but took no steps to investigate or reassign the supervisor. The company allowed the conduct to continue for months. Liability turns on whether the employer failed to exercise reasonable care in responding to known risks of harm.
A gross deviation from the reasonable-person benchmark that creates a substantial and unjustifiable risk of death or serious harm.
Captain Elena Morales directed crew members onto an exposed deck during a severe storm without life vests to meet the schedule. A large wave swept Luis Ortega overboard and he drowned. The common law treats the resulting unintentional killing as involuntary manslaughter when the captain's conduct grossly deviated from what a reasonable ship master would do in the same situation.
Nurse Elena rushed through a high-risk cardiac medication round and gave the drug to Mark after only a quick glance at the chart. Mark suffered serious complications from the misidentification. Under the Model Penal Code definition the nurse's failure to perceive the obvious risk of harm amounted to negligence because it constituted a gross deviation from the care a reasonable nurse would have exercised.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
View Food published an article accusing local food-safety director Eloise of accepting free services in exchange for ignoring violations. The site relied on an unverified tip and photographs without checking public records or contacting Eloise. A private plaintiff may recover actual damages by showing the publisher failed to exercise reasonable care in verifying the story.
Ernst & Ernst performed an audit for a brokerage firm but did not detect that the firm's president was using a fraudulent escrow scheme. Investors who lost money sued the accounting firm. The claim requires proof that the accountants failed to exercise reasonable care in reviewing the firm's records.
The traditional rule adjusts the standard for the minor's age and experience. The modern trend applies an adult standard when the minor engages in an adult activity such as operating heavy machinery or driving a vehicle.
States may impose liability on a media defendant for a statement about a private plaintiff on a matter of public concern upon a showing of negligence rather than actual malice. The plaintiff must still prove actual injury to recover compensatory damages.
Criminal negligence requires a gross deviation from the standard of care a reasonable person would observe and involves a substantial and unjustifiable risk of death or serious bodily harm. Ordinary civil negligence requires only a failure to exercise reasonable care. The higher threshold prevents every careless act that happens to cause death from becoming a homicide offense.
A person acts negligently when he should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a material element exists or will result from his conduct and the failure to perceive that risk amounts to a gross deviation from the standard of care a reasonable person would observe in the actor's situation.
…self-censorship, but, unlike the former rule, punitive damages are wholly irrelevant to the state interest that justifies a negligence standard for private defamation actions. They are not compensation for injury. Instead, they are private fines levied by civil juries to punish reprehensible conduct and to deter its future…