4-Year-Old Can Be Sued, Judge Rules in Bike Case

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"At what age does a child become responsible for understanding the consequences of her own actions? I don't know. But it isn't 4 for heavens sake. "


My four year old understands that her actions have consequences and she has for at least two years. Does she understand all of the consequences? Of course not. But, that is what lawsuits are supposed to sort out.

There's a difference between having some comprehension of cause and effect -- even a toddler is beginning to understand that -- and fully being RESPONSIBLE for the consequences of your actions, though.

I cannot fathom how the law could even possibly hold a child legally responsible for anything they do at the age of 4.

[Anonymous]

So what's the solution? (And don't say "Forgive a child for mowing down an elderly person and hastening her death")? If children can't be trusted to ride safely, should they be allowed to ride at all? We don't let them have guns or drive because we don't trust their judgment. So no bikes for kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So what's the solution? (And don't say "Forgive a child for mowing down an elderly person and hastening her death")? If children can't be trusted to ride safely, should they be allowed to ride at all? We don't let them have guns or drive because we don't trust their judgment. So no bikes for kids?

Maybe no reckless riding or riding above a certain mph on public sidewalks?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So what's the solution? (And don't say "Forgive a child for mowing down an elderly person and hastening her death")? If children can't be trusted to ride safely, should they be allowed to ride at all? We don't let them have guns or drive because we don't trust their judgment. So no bikes for kids?

OP here. I don't know that there is "a solution". If Person A runs, walks, bikes, or drives into Person A, and hurts them, and the matter goes so far as the court system, then the judge needs to decide if person A or person B was negligent, did not excercise due care, whatever the legal terms are. I get that.

I am just astounded that when person A is a 4 year old child, Person A is the one brought into court. I think it should be Person A's parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what's the solution? (And don't say "Forgive a child for mowing down an elderly person and hastening her death")? If children can't be trusted to ride safely, should they be allowed to ride at all? We don't let them have guns or drive because we don't trust their judgment. So no bikes for kids?

OP here. I don't know that there is "a solution". If Person A runs, walks, bikes, or drives into Person A, and hurts them, and the matter goes so far as the court system, then the judge needs to decide if person A or person B was negligent, did not excercise due care, whatever the legal terms are. I get that.

I am just astounded that when person A is a 4 year old child, Person A is the one brought into court. I think it should be Person A's parent.

We told you before that because Person A caused the injury, Person A has to be named in the suit in order to bring Person A's parent into the suit.

[Anonymous]

OK, so what if person A were a 3 year old, and therefore unable to be sued for negligence?

If you can't name a 3 year old Person A in the suit, does that mean there is no way to bring Person A's parent into the lawsuit?

For example, imagine a 3 year old person A is riding her tricicle and rides it into the street, causing person B to swerve her car and hit a pole and sustain severe injuries.

NY State law apparently says that a child under the age of 4 cannot be sued for negligence. So is there any way that a parent of child A could be sued for negligence in this scenario?

If there is -- why can't that way be used for suing the parents of the child who is 4?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is awful. Unless the parents are rich, the legal costs will really hurt the family, and the child will have to bear the guilt of that in addition to having harmed the elderly woman. Instead of doing the right thing and forgiving the child and her parent, the family bring the suit is just going to destroy the life of a young child. And it's VERY hard to supervise children on bikes so I don't really fault the parent either. We're such a litigious society. It's disgusting. Only parasitic lawyers benefit.

"Forgive" the child and her parent while the elderly woman was seriously injured (a broken hip is NO joke) and that injury may well have lead to her ultimate death? Even if there was an accident here, why should the victim of the accident (or her relatives) be the one to bear the harm of the accident, while those who caused the accident face no consequences. Would you be so quick to preach forgiveness if this was your own mother or grandmother instead of an unknown woman?

Not the poster you are quoting but I agree with her 100 percent. Also, you don't have to "forgive" the parent in order to refrain yourself from ruining a child's life. Is ruining a four year old's life going to bring back Grandma? And when all is said and done, does it "feel good" to know that that evil four year old is suffering for breaking granny's hip?

I have an old grandma and love her dearly. If she were badly injured by a child, I would be very angry at the child's parents (probably fairly or not -- it's human to be angry and want to blame). But I am proud to say that I KNOW I would stop short of suing a fucking child.

Sorry, but I think that makes me a better than you.

[Anonymous]

A lot of lawsuits that sound crazy and vengeful to outsiders are personal. I read that many doctors get hit with malpractice suits because they don't admit fault or do not apologize or accept responsibility thinking that that might be used against them to show culpability. So patients harmed or killed by mistakes or their families will file suit and ask for big damages when they are often just looking for a sincere apology and procedures implemented so that the same mistakes are not repeated. So I wonder if the child's family didn't own up to it (ie didn't offer a sincere apology, express true remorse, etc) so the victim's family got PO'd and sued? Or maybe they are looking for a change in the law. Of course, they may also be out for money or revenge.