Posted on 10/29/2010 10:06:49 AM PDT by markomalley
NEW YORK, Oct. 29 (UPI) -- Cycling back to cases settled in 1928, a New York judge determined a 4-year-old girl accused of running down an older woman while racing a bike can be sued.
Justice Paul Wooten's ruling earlier this month did not find that the girl was liable in the incident; it only allowed a lawsuit brought against her, another boy and their parents to proceed, The New York Times reported Friday.
The suit claims that, in April 2009, Juliet Breitman and Jacob Kohn, both 4 at the time, were racing their training wheel-equipped bicycles along a sidewalk, while mothers Dana Breitman and Rachel Kohn supervised. During their race, the children hit Claire Menagh, 87, as she was walking, causing injuries that required surgery, the complaint said. Menagh died three weeks later.
The woman's estate sued the children and their mothers, claiming they acted negligently. The girl's lawyer argued his client was too young to be held liable for negligence, the Times said. The boy and his mother didn't contest the suit.
In his opinion issued Oct. 1, Wooten said the girl was old enough to be sued, among other things.
If the mothers wanted the children to race their bikes, then they should have found a safe place to do it, or gone on ahead to make sure the coast was clear. The key word in sidewalk is “walk”. Sidewalks are for pedestrians.
If two 4 yr-olds are allowed to go careening down the sidewalk which has pedestrians, the mothers should be held responsible for the injury and complications that resulted in death. Who wants to bet they were talking and didn’t even see the elderly lady themselves?
She may even have jumped in front of them from a place of concealment, in a diabolical scheme to nab a pile of insurance money....
Seriously, though -- whether the old lady could be seen or not, there are generally laws against riding bikes on sidewalks, for this very reason.
Nobody argues that the kids didn't hit and injure her; and it is highly likely that the old woman's death was related to the injuries she suffered, and failure to recover from the subsequent surgery.
Indeed it is. Still sounds like a plan I could get on board with.
Are kids SUPPOSED to be racing bicycles on the sidewalk?
Ok. I am not an expert on Shakespeare. I know however that I oppose our present “legitimate government”. Just a thought.
Completely understandable, and reasonable. Don’t worry about the legal system here. The dead lady’s estate is within their rights to sue, and the judge has to uphold the law on that. However, the judge also has to uphold the law that will probably exonerate the little girl from liability.
Generally, although I am unsure of the specifics of New York law, children under 7 cannot be negligent. So, the judge will enforce that, too. The system works, but slowly. You have to plod through the motions.
Listen to all these perported conservatives! WTH?
Shalom.
So if the elderly lady died 3 weeks later, and assuming there were medical bills, who is responsible to pay them? If the insurance companies of the parents refused, does the deceased get to pay for the priviledge of being hurt and dying? Maybe that is why there is a lawsuit. Or not.
New York State has a rule-- and has had it since 1928-- that a child under 4 cannot possibly be negligent, but that if the child is over 4, it is up to the jury to decide. (Most states have a similar rule, but in some states the cutoff is 7.) Probably a pretty stupid rule, but the judge was right to follow precedent; if the rule is bad, the Legislature should be the one to change it.
Don't bash the judge for following established law-- that's what judges are supposed to do.
The child would never had been sued unless she was covered under the parents' homeowners' insurance policy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.