Formal definition of "out of order"?

[Will Braswell]

Can somebody please post the text and page number (preferably with web link) where RONR formally defines the term "out of order"?

In other words, what is RONR's official way to determine if a person or motion etc is rightfully considered to be "out of order" during a meeting?

Thanks in advance!

[Shmuel Gerber]

To (legally) obtain the text of RONR, you need to buy (or borrow) the book, which is available in several print and electronic editions. 

https://robertsrules.com/purchase/

Regarding your question:

4:16 "In principle, the chair must state the question on a motion immediately after it has been made and seconded, unless he is obliged to rule that the motion is not in order or unless, in his opinion, the wording is not clear."

4:17 "Rules and explanations relating to the conditions under which various motions are not in order will be found particularly in 5, 6, and 7; in 10:26–27; and in the first three of the “Standard Descriptive Characteristics” given in the sections on each of the parliamentary motions (11–37). When a member who has legitimately obtained the floor offers a motion which is not in order, the chair may be able, in certain instances, to suggest an alternative motion which would be in order and would carry out the desired intent to the satisfaction of the maker. If the chair is obliged to rule that the motion is not in order, he says, “The chair rules that the motion is not in order [or “is out of order”] because… [briefly stating the reason].” (He must not say, “You are out of order,” nor, “Your motion is out of order.” To state that a member is out of order implies that the member is guilty of a breach of decorum or other misconduct in a meeting; and even in such a case, the chair does not normally address the member in the second person. See 3:13; also 61.) If the chair rules that a motion is not in order, his decision is subject to an appeal to the judgment of the assembly. (For procedure regarding Appeal, see 24.)"

[Josh Martin]

On 3/8/2024 at 3:11 PM, Will Braswell said:

Can somebody please post the text and page number (preferably with web link) where RONR formally defines the term "out of order"?

In other words, what is RONR's official way to determine if a person or motion etc is rightfully considered to be "out of order" during a meeting?

Speaking generally, a motion is out of order if the motion itself violates some rule, or if the motion cannot be properly made under the current parliamentary situation (such as, for example, if a higher-ranking motion is currently pending).

If your question is whether a particular motion in a particular situation is out of order, we're going to need additional facts.

Edited March 9, 2024 at 02:13 PM by Josh Martin

[Rob Elsman]

The term, "out of order" in RONR (12th ed.) takes its ordinary meaning. I found the "formal" definition by consulting my favorite, reputable dictionary.

[Atul Kapur]

On 3/8/2024 at 4:11 PM, Will Braswell said:

Can somebody please post the text and page number .... what is RONR's official way to determine if a person or motion etc is rightfully considered to be "out of order" during a meeting?

In case you are not familiar with RONR method of referencing, Mr. Gerber's response guided you to 

- Sections 5, 6, and 7;

- Section 10:26–27; and

- Near the beginning of each of Sections 11-37 you will see a paragraph headed “Standard Descriptive Characteristics” and items 1-3 in each of those paragraphs.