Also known as: reasonable men of ordinary prudence · reasonable person · ordinary prudent person · reasonable care standard
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
The objective standard of care against which a person's conduct is measured to determine negligence or similar fault. It requires conformity to the conduct a hypothetical person of ordinary care and prudence would exercise under like circumstances.
Roberto Reyes, a dispatcher, received a report that a driver had nearly fallen asleep after a double shift and that icy conditions were forecast. Reyes directed the driver to proceed anyway to avoid overtime costs. The bus later skidded on ice and killed a passenger. Reyes's decision deviated from the conduct a reasonable man of ordinary prudence would have followed given the explicit safety warnings.
Renata Russo told a friend she had falsified loan documents that exposed her to criminal liability. The statement was offered at trial after Russo became unavailable. A reasonable man of ordinary prudence in Russo's position would have made the statement only if believed true because it was so contrary to her pecuniary and penal interests.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Rachel Ramirez, a plant supervisor, knew a valve was leaking but did not check it because she was distracted by production quotas. The leak caused an explosion that injured workers. Ramirez should have been aware of the substantial risk. Her failure to perceive it was a gross deviation from the standard a reasonable man of ordinary prudence would observe.
Ronald Reed, a sitting judge, agreed to serve as an unpaid advisor to a political advocacy group whose cases regularly appeared before his court. A reasonable man of ordinary prudence would conclude that the role undermined the judge's appearance of impartiality and independence.
Ruby Rivera told a buyer the used car had never been in an accident when she knew it had sustained major frame damage. A reasonable man of ordinary prudence would have regarded the statement as likely to induce the buyer to manifest assent to the purchase.
Raphael Rivera, age nine, rode his bicycle at high speed down a crowded sidewalk and struck a pedestrian. Because Raphael is a child, the standard of conduct to which he must conform is that of a reasonable man of like age, intelligence, and experience under like circumstances.
The standard is objective and does not take into account the individual defendant's personal shortcomings or abilities unless a recognized exception such as childhood or physical disability applies. Courts measure conduct against the hypothetical ordinary person rather than the defendant's own capacity.
Supporting sources
A child is held to the standard of a reasonable person of like age, intelligence, and experience under like circumstances rather than the adult reasonable man of ordinary prudence. This exception recognizes developmental limitations while still imposing an objective measure.
Yes. Criminal negligence requires a gross deviation from the standard of care a reasonable person would observe, creating a high risk of death or serious bodily harm. The common-law formulation of involuntary manslaughter incorporates this objective measure.
…questions that are presented by the constantly increasing power of science to keep the human body alive for longer than any reasonable person would want to inhabit it. The States have begun to grapple with these problems through legislation. I am concerned, from a proper judicial perspective, that we should not place additional…