A term you may hear in personal injury cases is the “reasonable person” standard. What does this mean, and how can it affect your case? A personal injury lawyer can explain.
Duty of Care
The reasonable person standard relates to the duty of care in personal injury cases, which is one of the essential elements you must prove in a successful negligence claim. In some cases, a contract, law, or relationship between the defendant and victim can determine what legal duty someone owes a victim.
However, in the absence of these factors, the reasonable person standard may be applied. The reasonable person standard could also be used to determine whether the victim’s actions were reasonable or if they were partially at fault for the accident.
Definition of a Reasonable Person
The reasonable person standard considers what a person of reasonable prudence would do under similar circumstances to the defendant’s.
Basically, if the defendant failed to behave as a reasonably prudent person would have under similar circumstances, they may have failed to uphold their duty of care and might be responsible for the harm they caused.
Definition of the Reasonable Person Standard
The reasonable person standard is the amount of care and caution an ordinary person would use in a given situation. This standard depends on the particular situation.
This fictitious legal standard helps to evaluate a person’s behavior after they have been involved in an accident. Tries of fact consider the actions of each person involved in an accident to determine whether their actions were at least as careful as those of a reasonable person. The standard depends on what is considered typical behavior.
Courts consider an average person’s usual behavior under similar circumstances. If the person’s behavior meets or exceeds this standard, they are considered not negligent.
But if they fail to meet it, they are deemed negligent.
Who Is a Reasonable Person?
When courts consider what a reasonable person is, they look at what a fictional, reasonable person would do in the same situation. Characteristics are applied in some situations, such as someone in the same age group or specialty area.
If a child is involved, their conduct is considered in light of how a child of the same age and average intelligence would have acted under similar circumstances. This is why, in some premises liability cases, child trespassers may be able to recover compensation if they are attracted to a dangerous nuisance on the property where adults would not be able to recover in similar situations.
If the person in question has a specialization, they may be compared to others in the same specialty area. For example, in medical malpractice cases, the question is whether the healthcare provider delivered medical treatment according to the accepted standard of care that another doctor in the same specialty area would have provided under similar circumstances.
Courts can consider defendants’ conduct based on their unique skills and knowledge as it relates to the case.
Contact Our Personal Injury Lawyers for a Free Legal Consultation
If you were injured in an accident and would like help establishing the reasonable person standard in your case, call Dulin McQuinn Young for help with your case.