Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
somekat

Im in your city, suing your 4 year olds.

Recommended Posts

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

By ALAN FEUER

Published: October 28, 2010

 

2009-03-15_1.JPG

 

 

Citing cases dating back as far as 1928, a judge has ruled that a young girl accused of running down an elderly woman while racing a bicycle with training wheels on a Manhattan sidewalk two years ago can be sued for negligence.

Readers' Comments

 

The ruling by the judge, Justice Paul Wooten of State Supreme Court in Manhattan, did not find that the girl was liable, but merely permitted a lawsuit brought against her, another boy and their parents to move forward.

 

The suit that Justice Wooten allowed to proceed claims that in April 2009, Juliet Breitman and Jacob Kohn, who were both 4, were racing their bicycles, under the supervision of their mothers, Dana Breitman and Rachel Kohn, on the sidewalk of a building on East 52nd Street. At some point in the race, they struck an 87-year-old woman named Claire Menagh, who was walking in front of the building and, according to the complaint, was “seriously and severely injured,” suffering a hip fracture that required surgery. She died three months later.

 

Her estate sued the children and their mothers, claiming they had acted negligently during the accident. In a response, Juliet’s lawyer, James P. Tyrie, argued that the girl was not “engaged in an adult activity” at the time of the accident — “She was riding her bicycle with training wheels under the supervision of her mother” — and was too young to be held liable for negligence.

 

In legal papers, Mr. Tyrie added, “Courts have held that an infant under the age of 4 is conclusively presumed to be incapable of negligence.” (Rachel and Jacob Kohn did not seek to dismiss the case against them.)

 

But Justice Wooten declined to stretch that rule to children over 4. On Oct. 1, he rejected a motion to dismiss the case because of Juliet’s age, noting that she was three months shy of turning 5 when Ms. Menagh was struck, and thus old enough to be sued.

 

Mr. Tyrie “correctly notes that infants under the age of 4 are conclusively presumed incapable of negligence,” Justice Wooten wrote in his decision, referring to the 1928 case. “Juliet Breitman, however, was over the age of 4 at the time of the subject incident. For infants above the age of 4, there is no bright-line rule.”

 

The New York Law Journal reported the decision on Thursday.

 

Mr. Tyrie had also argued that Juliet should not be held liable because her mother was present; Justice Wooten disagreed.

 

“A parent’s presence alone does not give a reasonable child carte blanche to engage in risky behavior such as running across a street,” the judge wrote. He added that any “reasonably prudent child,” who presumably has been told to look both ways before crossing a street, should know that dashing out without looking is dangerous, with or without a parent there. The crucial factor is whether the parent encourages the risky behavior; if so, the child should not be held accountable.

 

In Ms. Menagh’s case, however, there was nothing to indicate that Juliet’s mother “had any active role in the alleged incident, only that the mother was ‘supervising,’ a term that is too vague to hold meaning here,” he wrote. He concluded that there was no evidence of Juliet’s “lack of intelligence or maturity” or anything to “indicate that another child of similar age and capacity under the circumstances could not have reasonably appreciated the danger of riding a bicycle into an elderly woman.”

 

Mr. Tyrie, Dana Breitman and Rachel Kohn did not respond to messages seeking comment.

 

 

http://us.mg2.mail.yahoo.com/dc/launch?.gx=1&.rand=bt95sa0gp70fc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha funny responses... they sue the parent though (I think?) since the child is fucking FOUR. And that's just a random pic of some girl on a bike i got off of google. The whole thing should be dropped imo... shit happens all the time. People get hit by cars and don't sue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really, people sue all the time over car accidents, that's why you have to get insurance.

As for the old lady who got her hip broken because some spoiled brat rammed into her, she should have every right to sue.

The problem is the parents will play it off like it's not their fault and not pay for it, so why not.

If I was about to inherit mad loot but it all got fucked because of medical expenses I'd be pissed and try to sue myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, everybody knows you can sue a parent.

This kid is getting sued along with the parents.

I hope she ends up in foster care because her parents can't afford to pay restitution subsequently getting contempt of court charges landing them in jail.

 

FUCK KIDS.

This is the beginning of the war I have dreamed of to annihilate children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can't pull out in time you should be held responsible for any damage, if your kid is an asshole, they should also have their milk money garnished.

 

 

 

No back to school shopping for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
maybe old people shouldnt be out in public

Hear hear. It used to be a criminal offense in San Francisco to be ugly in public. Bring back the good ole days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll gladly take my chances in a war against kids.

I wish them nothing but the worst.

I hope all the bad things in life happen to them and only them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Register for a 12ozProphet forum account or sign in to comment

You need to be a forum member in order to comment. Forum accounts are separate from shop accounts.

Create an account

Register to become a 12ozProphet forum member.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×