Also known as: habit evidence · evidence of routine · Fed. R. Evid. 406 · habit or routine
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
Testimony or other proof describing a person's regular response to a repeated specific situation or an organization's consistent manner of conducting business. The evidence is offered to show that the person or organization acted in accordance with that pattern on a particular occasion.
Esther Eisenberg sued Blue Dispatch after its driver Ashley collided with her car at an unlit intersection. Blue Dispatch called Ashley's coworkers to describe her practice of stopping completely and counting to three at that crossing every night. The testimony was offered to show Ashley followed the same steps on the night of the accident.
Richard sued nurse Annie after she allegedly gave him medication without checking his wristband. Annie's colleague testified that Annie always scanned every patient's wristband and confirmed dates of birth aloud before injections. The testimony was offered to show Annie followed her usual steps when treating Richard.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Habit evidence describes a specific, repeated response to a particular situation. Character evidence describes a general propensity. Rule 406 permits habit evidence to prove conduct on a given occasion while character evidence faces stricter limits.
Supporting sources
No. The rule expressly allows admission of habit evidence regardless of whether it is corroborated or whether anyone saw the conduct on the occasion in question.
Supporting sources
The conduct must be specific, regular, and nearly automatic in response to a repeated situation. Occasional deviations under stress may weaken but do not automatically destroy the showing of habit.
Supporting sources
Yes. The rule covers both a person's habit and an organization's routine practice, allowing proof that the organization acted in accordance with that practice on a particular occasion.
Supporting sources
…that "Morgan's several times' statement is confusing and essentially unhelpful," and concluded that there was "no credible evidence of routine problems with disposing of recalled warrants." 451 F.Supp.2d, at 1292. This factual determination, supported by the record and credited by the Court of Appeals, see 492 F.3d, at 1219, is of…