What is reasonable person standard

In Robert v. Ring , the Minnesota Supreme Court held a seven-year-old boy to the standard of an objective seven-year-old boy, not to that of an adult. In Fletcher v. Aberdeen , the Supreme Court of Washington held that a blind person should be held to the objective reasonable standard of a blind person, not to a sighted person.

Please help us improve our site! They are held to the same level of care or conduct that a person who is reasonably skilled would exercise.

Courts hold them to a modified standard instead. Under this guideline, their conduct is compared to that of other children who are the same age and alike in their amount of experience and knowledge. However, there are certain jurisdictions such as driving, in which the adult standard of care does apply.

Call our office at and speak to a highly skilled attorney for free today. Our fee is on a contingency basis. If you are unable to come to any of our offices, we are happy to visit you at home or in the hospital.

In our scenario, a reasonable driver would have been paying attention to the road in front of them and gently applied the breaks to stop at a suitable distance from your vehicle, which was already at the stop sign.

Barring extenuating circumstances, that is how a reasonable person would meet their duty of care as a driver. Working with an experienced attorney can help you recoup the cost of medical bills, property damage, and the expense of rebuilding your life after a serious injury.

Your attorney will file your claim, help build your case, negotiate with the defendant or their representatives, and argue for you in court. The help you need starts with a free consultation with a Philadelphia attorney from Anapol Weiss.

Your case becomes our cause as we work to understand your specific situation and needs, offer you the best path forward, and fight to protect your rights. Contact us today to start your claim. Age Children are frequently cited as the main exception to the reasonable person standard. Ability A person who lacks the mental or physical capacity to act as a reasonable person cannot be held to that standard, although in many cases there is a person in a custodial role who may then be liable.

Professional Obligation Authority figures and high-level professionals, such as police officers, doctors, or wealth advisors, often carry responsibilities outside those of your average reasonable person standard and have a level of training that is commensurate with the expectations their job places on them, thus they are held to a higher standard.

Applying the Reasonable Person Standard As an example of this standard in effect, consider a common auto collision, the rear-ender. A successful personal injury case rests on proving three elements: You were injured mentally, physically, financially, or otherwise by another party. The party that injured you had a responsibility to behave in a certain manner, also called a duty of care, that would have prevented the injury.