Also known as: persons of ordinary prudence · reasonable person · prudent person · ordinary prudent person
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
The hypothetical individual whose conduct sets the benchmark for determining whether a party has acted with reasonable care under the circumstances. This standard measures negligence by asking whether the actor's behavior deviated from what this person would have done in the same situation.
Evan, an unlicensed contractor, repaired a cracked gas line for homeowner Carla using only tape and scrap tubing. A week later the line leaked and exploded, killing neighbor Nora. Because a person of ordinary prudence would have recognized the substantial risk and used proper materials or called a qualified professional, Evan's conduct constituted criminal negligence supporting involuntary manslaughter.
While facing indictment, declarant Perry Pratt told a friend that he had hidden company funds in an offshore account. A person of ordinary prudence in Perry's position would have made that statement only if he believed it true, because it exposed him to civil and criminal liability. The statement therefore qualifies as a statement against interest.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Pablo Perez stored volatile chemicals in an unventilated shed next to a school playground. A person of ordinary prudence would have perceived the substantial and unjustifiable risk of explosion and stored the chemicals in a secure, remote facility. Pablo's failure to perceive that risk constituted negligence under the Model Penal Code.
Judge Pearl Porter invested in a company that regularly appeared before her court. A person of ordinary prudence would conclude that the investment undermined the judge's impartiality. The conduct therefore violates the judicial conduct rule.
Seller Philip Powell told buyer Paula Pierce that a used car had never been in an accident, although he knew it had. A person of ordinary prudence would have been induced to purchase the car by that statement. The misrepresentation is therefore material and supports rescission.
Twelve-year-old Pilar Pena rode her bicycle through a busy intersection without looking. Because Pilar is a child, the standard of conduct is that of a reasonable person of like age, intelligence, and experience. A jury must therefore decide whether her conduct fell below that adjusted benchmark.
The person of ordinary prudence is an idealized standard, not the statistical average. Courts measure conduct against this hypothetical figure to determine whether the actor's behavior was reasonable under the circumstances.
Supporting sources
For children the standard becomes that of a reasonable person of like age, intelligence, and experience. Mental deficiency does not lower the standard, but physical disability is taken into account.
Criminal negligence requires a gross deviation from the conduct a person of ordinary prudence would observe, creating a high risk of death or serious bodily harm. This exceeds ordinary civil negligence.
A misrepresentation is material if it would be likely to induce a person of ordinary prudence to manifest assent. The maker's knowledge that the recipient would be induced also satisfies the test.
Yes. A judge must avoid extrajudicial activities that would appear to a person of ordinary prudence to undermine the judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality.
…Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul , 373 U. S. 132, 146 (1963). While it is doubtful that any State, or indeed any reasonable person, would argue that it is wise policy to allow students to carry guns on school premises, considerable disagreement exists about how best to accomplish that goal. In this circumstance, the…