Philadelphia PA Lawyer Talks About Children's Injuries

The law recognizes that children and adults are different. When measuring children’s conduct, the courts depart from the reasonable man standard generally used to judge adult behavior. The courts make allowance for the immaturity and special needs of children. In the personal injury realm, this manifests itself in several ways:

• Children may be presumed incapable of negligence due to their tender years.

• Distribution of the settlement proceeds for an injured minor involves special precautions.

• A lien may be placed on the settlement for an adult who owes child support.

• Children injured while trespassing may be treated leniently.

This month I will address the issue of children and negligence. This discussion involves Pennsylvania law. Your state’s law may be similar.

The younger the child is, the stronger the presumption that he or she is not capable of negligence. Minors under the age of seven are presumed incapable of negligence. This is a presumption that cannot be rebutted, regardless of the facts of the incident. Thus, if a six year old is struck by a car, this child will generally prevail in a suit against the driver.

The major caveat is that the driver’s negligence still must be proven. Unless the child ran directly into the side of the car, and the driver had no opportunity to react, it should not be hard to attribute some degree of negligence to the driver. If the child was visible to the motorist for even a second or two, the child’s chances for success in this litigation are quite good. The adult motorist is presumed to have the capacity to take steps to protect the safety of the child, and he or she must take them promptly.

Minors between the ages of seven and fourteen are also presumed incapable of negligence. This presumption, however, is rebuttable. The presumption grows weaker as the fourteenth year is approached. Yet even a fourteen year old is not held to the same standard of care as an adult.