It was recently reported by the media outlets that a 52-year-old Manhattan woman had filed a lawsuit seeking $127,000 in damages from her nephew because she broke her wrist in a fall. She said that she and her nephew fell after he leaped to greet her during his 8th birthday party. She said as he leaped in the air to greet her, she had to catch him and at that time, they tumbled to the ground.
The minor was named as the only defendant in the case. She said he should have known better than leap at her in such a way and should be held accountable for his actions. She admits she didn’t complain about her wrist for the first couple of years after the incident, but after she didn’t see an improvement in symptoms, she believed the minor should be held responsible.
Can a Minor be Held Accountable?
In this case, the minor was listed as the only defendant in the lawsuit. While a minor can be held accountable for injuries and damages, it is usually the parents who are held responsible for the financial judgments against their child. In this case, the child’s mother had died before the court hearing. So the responsibility of the debt would have most likely fallen back on the father according to a Baltimore accident attorney.
When this case went before the jury, the ruling was in favor of the defendant. In this case, there were no indications that the boy knew his aunt would fall or be injured. He was simply excited to see her at his birthday party and ran to greet her. According to court documents, the boy jumped off his bicycle he had received for his birthday and ran to greet his aunt, screaming “I love you.”
The criminal defense attorney Seattle, argued he was a normal 8-year-old caught up in the moment and had no intent of causing his aunt to break her wrist during a fall. In this case, the jury agreed with the defendant’s argument. The plaintiff alleges that the broken wrist has had a negative effect on her social life and also makes it more challenging to climb up to her third floor apartment.
The jury agreed with the defendant’s attorney by feeling as though the child was not negligent. Instead, he was just an excited child who wanted to hug his aunt. The plaintiff made no comment after the ruling, but it was later said that the laws in the defendant’s state of Connecticut made the lawsuit necessary as homeowner’s policies won’t pay up until a lawsuit is filed.