What Is Considered a “Reasonable Person” When It Comes To Negligence?

Negligence is a crucial concept in the field of law, especially in cases involving personal injuries. Central to negligence cases is the concept of the “reasonable person,” which plays a vital role in determining liability.

Defining the Reasonable Person

The “reasonable person” is an imaginary standard used to assess how an average person should act in a given situation. This standard is used to evaluate whether a person’s actions were prudent and whether they took appropriate precautions.

Factors Influencing the Reasonable Person Standard

• Knowledge and Expertise: The reasonable person is assumed to have a certain level of knowledge and expertise in relevant areas. Professionals are held to a higher standard based on their specific training and experience.
• Physical Attributes: The reasonable person’s physical abilities and limitations are taken into account. This includes considerations of age, health, and any disabilities.
• Cultural and Social Norms: The reasonable person standard is influenced by prevailing cultural and societal norms. What might be considered reasonable behavior in one context may not be in another.
• Emergency Situations: The standard of care may be adjusted in emergency situations where split-second decisions are required.

Application in Negligence Cases

In a negligence case, the court evaluates whether the defendant’s (at-fault party’s) actions align with what a reasonable person would have done in a similar situation. If the defendant’s actions fall below the standard of care expected of a reasonable person, they may be found negligent and responsible for any resulting damages.

Understanding the Burden of Proof in Personal Injury Cases

When a personal injury case goes to court, the burden of proving negligence falls to the injury victim who is the plaintiff in the case. Although the majority of personal injury cases are settled outside of court through direct negotiations with the insurance company of the at-fault party—the defendant in the case—an experienced personal injury attorney in Philadelphia prepares the case as though they are going to trial to establish negligence and make a compelling claim for compensation.

This requires proving the at-fault party’s negligence by a “preponderance of the evidence,” or showing that it’s more likely than not that the at-fault party caused the injury through their carelessness, recklessness, or wrongdoing—their failure to act the way a reasonable person would have under the same circumstances.

The “preponderance of the evidence” standard in civil court isn’t as difficult to meet as the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard in criminal court but still requires compelling evidence to prove liability.

When personal injury cases go to court, the jury is often tasked with asking themselves, “Would a reasonable person have behaved the same way as the defendant in these circumstances?”

When they find that a reasonable person would have been more prudent or taken greater care to avoid causing harm, then they find the defendant liable for the victim’s damages like medical expenses, lost income, and compensation for pain and suffering.

Examples of the Reasonable Person Standard

Driver Negligence

A driver is expected to follow traffic rules, adjust speed to road conditions, and exercise caution. If they fail to do so, causing an accident, they may not meet the reasonable person standard and be found negligent. 

Medical Malpractice

Healthcare professionals are held to a standard based on their training and expertise in their field. When they fail to meet that standard, resulting in harm to a patient, it is considered medical malpractice for which they can be held liable. 

Premises Liability

Property owners must maintain a safe environment and address hazards in a timely manner. When they fail to fix hazards they knew of or should have known about, causing harm to a visitor, they can be found negligent and responsible for injuries and damages. 

How Do You Prove What a Reasonable Person Would Have Done?

Proving what a reasonable person would have done in a specific situation is a critical aspect of negligence cases. Your personal injury lawyer may hire experts in the relevant field to be called upon to provide their professional opinion on what a reasonable person would have done in similar circumstances. For example, in a medical malpractice case, a healthcare professional might testify about the standard of care in that particular situation that resulted in your harm.

Eyewitnesses who observed the incident may provide valuable perspectives on how the situation unfolded and whether the actions of the parties involved were reasonable. Physical evidence, such as video footage or written records, can serve as objective evidence of what occurred and how individuals behaved in a given situation. In addition, scientific studies, reports, or research findings can offer empirical data to support claims about what a reasonable person would have done.

In addition, past legal cases with similar circumstances can provide guidance on what courts have considered reasonable behavior in similar situations.

What Evidence Can I Preserve After an Injury to Meet the Preponderance of Evidence After a Personal Injury?

Because sudden, unexpected injuries are painful and traumatic, often the victim isn’t able to collect or preserve evidence at the scene, or they don’t think to do so. However, by taking purposeful action during the chaotic aftermath of an injury, the victim can protect their physical safety and also later prove the at-fault party’s failure to meet the reasonable person standard. After an injury, a cell phone becomes a critical tool to document evidence at the scene that would otherwise later disappear. Use a cell phone—or hand it to an uninjured person to use for you—and do the following:

• First, call 911 for an ambulance if the injury is life-threatening, or call to arrange transportation to a hospital straight from the scene of the accident or injury
• Then, use your phone’s camera to take photos of the cause of the accident, whether it’s  a wet floor in a restaurant or the damaged vehicles after a car accident
• Photograph any visible injuries
• Record a statement about what you remember of the moments leading up to the injury while it’s fresh in your mind
• Add the contact information of anyone involved, like other drivers or the property owner after a fall
• Add the contact information of eyewitnesses to the injury

This evidence from the scene helps to prove that the at-fault party didn’t take reasonable actions to prevent your injury. At the hospital, you should also gather evidence to prove your damages, like a detailed medical report and your bills for treatment.

Hiring A Philadelphia Personal Injury Attorney is Critical

If you or a loved one has been injured due to another party’s negligence, establishing what a reasonable person would have done can be a complex process. It requires a thorough understanding of the law, the specific circumstances of the case, and the relevant industry or field. A skilled Philadelphia personal injury lawyer may use a combination of the above methods and others to build a compelling case on your behalf and ensure you recover the compensation you deserve. Arrange a free consultation today.