Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In law, a reasonable person, reasonable man, sometimes referred to situationally, [1] is a hypothetical person whose character and care conduct, under any common set of facts, is decided through reasoning of good practice or policy. [2] [3] It is a legal fiction [4] crafted by the courts and communicated through case law and jury instructions. [5]
The work is considered obscene only if all three conditions are satisfied. [citation needed] The first two prongs of the Miller test are held to the standards of the community, and the third prong is based on "whether a reasonable person would find such value in the material, taken as a whole". [5] For legal scholars, several issues are important.
Absent a formal arrest, the issue is whether a reasonable person in the suspect's position would have believed that he was under "full custodial" arrest. [ Note 6 ] Applying this objective test, the Court has held Miranda does not apply to roadside questioning of a stopped motorist or to questioning of a person briefly detained on the street ...
Reasonable danger [5] Reasonable diligence [8] Reasonable doubt; Reasonable expectation [5] (Legitimate expectation is sometimes called reasonable expectation.) [9] Reasonable facilities [5] [7] Reasonable fitness [5] Reasonable mind [5] Reasonable and non-discriminatory licensing; Reasonable person or reasonable man [5] Reasonable portion [5 ...
The man on the Clapham omnibus is a hypothetical ordinary and reasonable person, used by the courts in English law where it is necessary to decide whether a party has acted as a reasonable person would – for example, in a civil action for negligence. The character is a reasonably educated, intelligent but nondescript person, against whom the ...
In deciding whether such entry was legal, courts will consider whether a reasonable and prudent person would have considered there was need to make an immediate entry. [ 10 ] In the 1925 Supreme Court case Carroll et al. v. United States, George Carroll and John Kiro were indicted and convicted for carrying "spirituous liquor" in contravention ...
For these purposes, therefore, where the relevant statutes are silent and it is for the common law to form the basis of potential liability, the reasonable person must be endowed with the same intellectual and physical qualities as the accused, and the test must be whether an accused with these specific attributes would have had the requisite ...
In law, subjective standard and objective standards are legal standards for knowledge or beliefs of a plaintiff or defendant. [1] [2]: 554–559 [3]An objective standard of reasonableness ascertains the knowledge of a person by viewing a situation from the standpoint of a hypothetical reasonable person, without considering the particular physical and psychological characteristics of the defendant.