So you can sue a 4yr old.

alltwistedup

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/29/nyregion/29young.html?no_interstitial

Does this seem ridiculous to anyone else?

emily0829

I can kind of understand suing the mothers of the children, but not the children themselves. What the heck are they going to pay out? Their legos?

starryeyeddreamer

I just saw that too. I would be upset too but to sue a 4 yr old - I don't get it.

turtlerun

Sue the parents for it not the kiddos!!!  Wow, just wow

alltwistedup

turtlerun:

Sue the parents for it not the kiddos!!!  Wow, just wow

Yeah I agree, I was totally shocked that they weren't going after the parents.

mojito14

Most 4 year olds only think of themselves and have a one track mind (it's natural for that age). Preston would have know idea what he even did until he was told that it was a bad/naughty thing to do.

Erin0922

mojito14:

Most 4 year olds only think of themselves and have a one track mind?(it's natural for that age). Preston would have know idea what he even did until he was told that it was a bad/naughty thing to do.

I understand him not being aware of the VASTNESS of the situation, but I (hope!) that at 4 he knows not to run into people with his bike.

P is just shy of 4, and knows bike etiquette - no running into parked vehicles (the sometimes jut wayyyy over the sidewalk in our neighborhood), no running into people, knowing when to slow down, etc. He knows that those behaviors are bad, and will cause him to lose his biking privileges.

Not saying I would ever sue a 4yo (or even their parents for that matter - I doubt the mothers would have been able to physically prevent the action) but I am saying that at 4, you should know what's right/wrong - or you shouldn't be on a bike.?

LoriZoo

It is ridiculous to apply laws governing adults to children, particularly children the age of 4.  To use laws from 1924, is only making their claim even more ridiculous!

Yes, children may be told how to behave and how to act properly, but should they be held criminally liable if they don't do what they've been guided to do?  I think not. 

kate930

Just FYI, this lawsuit is probably by the older woman's insurance company. They are looking to be reimbursed for the cost of medical bills. They are hoping to recover from the insurance company covering the liable party. They probably are unable to get any liability from the mother, which leaves the child the only option. I doubt they are going to have an easy trial in front of a jury! 

Usually injury cases involving absurd defendants (i.e. children against parents, husbands against wives) are one insurance company trying to recover from another. 

(Oh, and negligence is not criminal, it's civil liability.)