Also known as:reasonable men · reasonable person · reasonable person standard · objective standard
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An objective standard by which a person's conduct or belief is measured against what an ordinary prudent person would do or believe in the same circumstances.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
6
Criminal Negligence Causing Death
Ronald Reed left an unsecured ladder leaning against a busy sidewalk while repairing a roof. A gust of wind toppled the ladder onto a pedestrian below, causing fatal injuries. The prosecution charged Reed with involuntary manslaughter on the theory that his failure to secure the ladder created a high risk of death that a reasonable person would have avoided.
Statement Against Pecuniary Interest
Riley Rivera told a business partner that she had diverted corporate funds to a personal account. The statement exposed Rivera to civil liability for breach of fiduciary duty. A court later considered whether a reasonable person in Rivera's position would have made the statement only if she believed it true.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Cases
Federal Rules
Uniform Acts
Model Codes
Common Law
Restatements
Casebooks
Hornbooks
Study Supplements
Dictionaries
Rachel Ramirez stored flammable chemicals near an open flame in a crowded warehouse without checking ventilation. A fire erupted and killed a coworker. Prosecutors argued that Ramirez acted negligently because her conduct involved a gross deviation from the standard of care a reasonable person would observe in the same situation.
Judicial Impartiality Concern
Judge Ryan Roberts accepted a paid speaking engagement at a political advocacy group that regularly litigates before his court. The group publicized the event with photographs of the judge. A party moved to disqualify him, claiming the appearance would lead a reasonable person to question his impartiality.
Material Misrepresentation in Contract
Ralph Richardson told buyer Regina Robinson that a commercial building had no structural defects. Richardson knew the foundation had recently cracked. Robinson relied on the statement and purchased the property. She later claimed the misrepresentation was material because it would have induced a reasonable person to manifest assent.
Tort Negligence Standard
Riverstone Manufacturing left a loading dock slippery after a spill and failed to post warnings or clean it promptly. Employee Raven Logistics slipped and broke her leg. The court instructed the jury to measure the company's conduct against the standard of a reasonable man under like circumstances.
Common questions
Frequently Asked
4
How does the reasonable man standard differ from a subjective test?+
The reasonable man standard measures conduct or belief against an objective ordinary prudent person rather than the defendant's personal characteristics or beliefs. Courts apply it to determine whether criminal negligence, material misrepresentation, or judicial bias exists.
Supporting sources
Does the reasonable man standard account for a defendant's individual limitations?+
No. The standard remains objective and does not adjust for the defendant's personal traits unless the defendant is a child. An adult defendant is held to the care a reasonable person would exercise in the same situation.
Supporting sources
When is a statement against interest admissible under the reasonable person test?+
A statement is against interest if a reasonable person in the declarant's position would have made it only if believing it true because it was contrary to pecuniary or proprietary interest or exposed the declarant to civil or criminal liability.
Supporting sources
What makes a misrepresentation material under the reasonable person test?+
A misrepresentation is material if it would likely induce a reasonable person to manifest assent to the contract or if the maker knows it would induce the recipient to do so.
Supporting sources
514 U.S. 549 (1995)Constitutional Law
…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…