Girl can be sued !!

EnglishLady

Veteran Expediter
From the BBC News
29 October 2010 Last updated at 22:16 ET


New York child sued for woman's death after bike crash

The judge ruled the four-year-old girl was old enough to be held negligent under law A New York child can be sued for crashing a bicycle into an elderly pedestrian and causing injuries that led to her death, a judge has ruled.

Juliet Breitman and another child were four years old when they raced their small bicycles on a Manhattan street and ran into Claire Menagh, 87.

Juliet's lawyer had argued Juliet was too young to be held negligent.

The judge disagreed, ruling Juliet's lawyer had presented no evidence she lacked intelligence or maturity.

According to court filings, in April 2009, Juliet Breitman and Jacob Kohn were accompanied by their mothers, Dana Breitman and Rachel Kohn, as they raced their bicycles along the pavement near the East River in New York's Manhattan borough.

'No bright line'

The children struck Ms Menagh, knocking her to the ground. She underwent surgery for a fractured hip and died three months later.

Ms Menagh - and later her son, acting as executor of her estate - sued the children, arguing they were "negligent in their operation and control of their bicycles". The estate also sued Dana Breitman and Rachel Kohn, saying they had consented to the race.

Juliet's lawyer sought to have the case dismissed, filing with the court a copy of Juliet's birth certificate showing she was four years and nine months old at the time of the accident.

Citing several cases involving young children who had been in accidents, New York Supreme Court Judge Paul Wooten ruled that Juliet, now six years old, could be sued.

While he noted that the law presumes children under age four are incapable of negligence, "for infants above the age of four, there is no bright line rule", he wrote in the decision.

He also wrote that the Juliet's lawyer had presented no evidence as to the child's lack of intelligence or maturity, nor that "a child of similar age and capacity" would not have understood the danger of riding a bicycle into an old woman.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
The version I read stated that the elderly woman's death was unrelated to the accident, and the suit is to collect for the medical costs from the accident, not her death.
Of course, it's the parents who will be held responsible, and I'm all for that - they shouldn't have allowed their children to race on a sidewalk that was also used by others - that was just irresponsible, IMO.
The headline gets one's attention, for sure, lol.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
That's the one: it says she died of unrelated causes, and thank goodness, or they'd be charging those kids with manslaughter, eh? :eek:
I know it's a moot point, but the medical costs of surgery are exorbitant [especially for the elderly, who face higher risks, and don't recover as quickly], and worth suing for, when they are caused by someone else's negligence. And I do believe the mothers were negligent, allowing the kids to behave as they did. But I think the law requires that the actual perpetrators be named, no matter their age, or who will pay for their behavior.
Maybe a wake up call for parents who let their kids run wild, one hopes.
Which is an issue I have strong feelings about, having been a server [catering & restaurants], and being terrified of the prospect of injuring someone because a wild child tripped me, or bumped me....

 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
The parents should be controlling their kids. NYC is NOT a good place to raise a kid in my opinion. There is just no room for a kid to be a kid. Where are they going t race their bikes? It is too crowded and dangerous on the NYC side walks/streets to be sure and the should not have been doing it. But where can they? Hard to be a normal kid in a place like that. I could never do that to a kid. Kids need room and safety to run free, skin knees, break a bone or two. They need room and safety to be a kid.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
Sorry, LOS, I disagree. Yes, kids need exercise, but they don't need to run wild - even my dog seldom gets to do that. Self control and regard for the safety of others should take priority, IMO. If they haven't anywhere to run free in the neighborhood, they can go to the park, or gym, or the Y - but they have no right to endanger elderly folks walking along the public sidewalks.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Sorry, LOS, I disagree. Yes, kids need exercise, but they don't need to run wild - even my dog seldom gets to do that. Self control and regard for the safety of others should take priority, IMO. If they haven't anywhere to run free in the neighborhood, they can go to the park, or gym, or the Y - but they have no right to endanger elderly folks walking along the public sidewalks.

Where did I say that kids should be allowed to run wild? Kids, and dogs, need LOTS of room to be happy. That does NOT include running over people. Kids need to be OUTSIDE, eating dirt, scraping knees, breaking bones etc. That does NO include running over little old ladies. The parents were a fault. A 4 year old does NOT have the ability to reason at that age.
 
Top