heed

(redirected from heeding)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Encyclopedia.
Related to heeding: bewailing

give heed to (something)

To listen carefully or pay close attention; to give ample or due consideration. You'd best give heed to his advice, or you might end up suffering the mistakes he made in the past. Give heed to your mother, she knows what she's talking about.
See also: give, heed

pay heed to (something)

To listen carefully or pay close attention; to give (something) ample or due consideration. You'd best pay heed to his advice, or you might end up suffering the mistakes he made in the past. Pay heed to your mother, she knows what she's talking about.
See also: heed, pay

take heed (of someone or something)

To pay close attention to and consider carefully (what someone or something indicates, advises, or instructs). Take heed—you're getting involved with very dangerous people. We should have taken heed of the warning signs. He didn't take heed of the doctors, and now he's struggling to survive.
See also: heed, someone, take

pay heed to someone

to listen to and accommodate someone. You had better pay heed to your father! They are not paying heed to what I told them.
See also: heed, pay

take heed (of someone or something)

to be cautious with someone or something; to pay attention to someone or something. We will have to take heed of Wendy and see what she will do next. You will learn to take heed of these little signs that things are not going well.
See also: heed, take

give/pay ˈheed (to somebody/something)

,

take ˈheed (of somebody/something)

(formal) pay careful attention to somebody/something: They gave little heed to the rumours.I paid no heed at the time but later I had cause to remember what he’d said.
See also: give, heed, pay
References in periodicals archive ?
Defense counsel should argue strenuously that the Restatement (Third) has rejected the heeding presumption and instead encourages safer designs.
The entire premise of the heeding presumption (1) is inconsistent with real-world experience that users ignore warnings; (2) is based on evidence that is not sufficiently reliable or scientific; and (3) allows, indeed encourages, speculative evidence to prove what plaintiffs might have done.
Thus, the heeding presumption should not be used because it allows unreliable, unscientific evidence, contrary to the trend to require reliable, scientific evidence.
Because the heeding presumption is mainly a question of policy, defense counsel must assert as many policy arguments as possible against it.
* Otherwise inadmissible character evidence is allowed when the heeding presumption arises.
* No evidence exists that fewer injuries will result if the heeding presumption applies.
The heeding presumption is unfair to defendants, by making them pay for more injuries than they actually cause.
* The heeding presumption does not encourage manufacturers to provide more warnings.
* The heeding presumption may cause a disincentive to produce safer products.
Although a number of courts recognize the heeding presumption, defense counsel have the potential to be successful in persuading a court to reject the heeding presumption because of the adamant criticism that exists and the strong arguments against invocation.
Henke, The Heeding Presumption in Failure to Warn Cases: Opening Pandora's Box?
1993) (stating that Technical Chemical court did not adopt heeding presumption, but rather "concluded that even if there were such a presumption, there was sufficient evidence to show that plaintiff would have disregarded any warning given") and Magro v.
Yelenick & Jack Ferro, Fallacies Underlying the "Heeding Presumption," FOR THE DEFENSE, April 2001, at 23, citing Precise Eng'g Inc.
1984) (justifying heeding presumption on "risk-spreading" public policy rationale)).
Hobart Corp.: Obvious Dangers, The Duty to Warn of Safer Alternatives, and the Heeding Presumption, 65 BROOK.