It is the passer's responsibility to pass safely.
If the kid had swerved into her path, she might have a case (though it seems that she was travelling far too fast, so even then it wouldn't be a slam dunk), but if he stopped and waited for her to pass, it's not his fault that she tried to squeeze by without enough room.
On the other hand, the idea that the problem is the kid's age is frankly asinine. If it was actually the kid's fault, she'd be perfectly right to sue, I don't care if he's seven, or five, or three years old.
*SIGH*
A minor is a person who is not of legal age. How can you sue someone who is not have full legal rights? (And we're not talking about a crime committed here). Maybe--maybe--the parents can be sued if their own recklessnes is responsible for what a child does. This case doesn't warrant that, IMO.
Whether on a bike on a bike path or in a car in a neighborhood I slow down when approaching kids. You never know what they might do.
It is called common sense. It is not the kids' fault.
I agree. The situation is similar to that of downhill skiing, where the higher elevation skiier is responsible for avoiding the lower elevation one.
What's she going to take -- his teddy bear? No assets. No contributory negligence on the part of the parents either.