What can I do if my child was severely injured at a church event? 29 Answers as of February 16, 2012

I would think the church has some sort of casualty insurance. You may be able to successfully sue the church, the supervising church employee, the aggressive boy and the aggressor's parents (homeowner's policy).

These events are usually insured in order to take place.

In such an event, the parents will likely be presented with exorbitant amounts of medical costs. Whether there is health insurance available or some form of health insurance through the two entities, i.e. school and or church, these costs and policies will need to be handled in accordance with policy language. Unfortunately, most insurance companies will attempt to deny a number of costs associated with medical treatment, and may or may not base their reasoning of the denial on policy language. Once again, suitable representation will allow the parents to shore up the aggregate difference between denials and proper payment of medical treatment. Again, this will be contingent upon policy language and the appropriate presentment of healthcare bills in accordance with standard operating procedures of each company. The main benefit of the aforementioned would be that the parents would not find themselves in a position, to either pay out-of-pocket or limit the payout of the medical costs and will properly align future recovery associated with those costs. Finally, the parents may not, with the proper handling of costs, be in a position where they are forced into bankruptcy. If the aforementioned is properly handled most of the costs that do come out-of-pocket and any healthcare provider liens, subrogation interest by the insurance company, costs associated with future medical care, including but not limited to neurological, physical therapy, counseling, etc., would likely be recoverable. In relation to the scope of the question, notably, "what course of action should the parents take?" It is my firm belief that provided the fact pattern presented in this case, coupled with the serious nature of the injuries, representation should immediately be sought out. Quite frankly, the presented fact pattern suggests this situation becoming rougher long before it is smooth again. With proper representation the parents can focus on their child's health, welfare, and well-being without having to fight multiple insurance companies that are simply trying to save money. I have found and my own experience in situations as severe as that with parents supporting their injured child, and not dealing with the administrative aftermath, they actually speed the recovery of the injured child, thus mitigating their damages. This article will soon be republished on my website Bodeylaw.com. At some point in time attempts will be made to settle the bodily injury portion of the claim by the tortfeasor's insurance company. This settlement usually incorporates the aforementioned future medical care required. Generally, minors in the state of Washington cannot, due to capacity issues, enter into contracts and or releases. So how would an insurance company/defendant obtain a release for settlement purposes that would be effective and valid? In 1992, the Washington State Supreme Court in Scott By and Through Scott v. Pacific West Mountain Resort stated, "courts often hold that in a post injury setting a parent's signature on a release is ineffective to bar a minors claims against a negligent party. Washington law is in accord. Under Washington law parents may not settle or release a child's claim without prior court approval. Further, in any settlement of a minor's claim, Washington law provides that a guardian ad litem must be appointed (unless independent counsel represents the child) in a hearing held to approve the settlement. See SPR 98.16W; Scott By and Through Scott v. Pacific West Mountain Resort, 119 Wn.2d 484, 494, 834 P.2d 6, 12 (Wash. 1992). Many defendants and insurance companies believe, and this is based on past experience, that there is a monetary threshold for the appointment of a settlement guardian ad litem. My research indicates that this is patently false. I have not been presented with any information statutory and or otherwise, which would be contrary to this assertion. That is not to say that I would not invite such case law or statutes. That being said, it is clear that the Washington State Supreme Court mandates that under SPR 98.16W a guardian ad litem shall be appointed in every minor settlement, unless there is independent counsel. My experience has been that even with independent counsel courts "tend" to appoint settlement guardian ad litem's to ensure that the interests of the child has been maintained. Irrespective under both scenarios a hearing must occur. This hearing allows the judge to review the supporting documentation in relation to the minor settlement. Thus, prior to any settlement, because the parent's signature on a release for and on behalf of a minor is ineffective legally, a hearing must occur to evaluate and discuss the child's interest in relation to the settlement. I believe it wise provided the aforementioned that you seek legal counsel in relation to this matter. This can be, depending on the factual situation, rife with legal pitfalls potentially for the parents and very conceivably for the defendants who are trying to obtain a release which limits or absolves them from liability. If a release is signed by the parent and settlement occurs, case law in this situation clearly speaks to the fact that settlement has only occurred for loss of consortium claims for the parents. The minor's claim continues to survive by a stayed or tolled statute of limitations, typically three years in the state of Washington, and only begins to run at the age of 18 for the minor. Omitting the aforementioned exception, in Washington State the personal injury action must be brought generally speaking, within three years of the incident which triggered the injury. If the three years passes, for a person of majority, then they are barred completely from bringing or asserting any claims for injuries. In short, what this means is the minor can bring a claim for injuries until the age of 21, approximately, for injuries sustained. This is atypical for a person of majority, i.e., a person over the 18 years of age, which is three years. Thus, I would find it very surprising that any defendant would not follow the proper course in relation to minor settlements; unless, of course, statistically entities have discovered that claims involving minors are generally not presented after parents are offered, and accept insufficient settlement offers on behalf of the minor. With that, the insurance company/defendant would then allow the statute of limitations to expire. Provided that rationale, it is likely that the insurance company/defendant would not be forthright in educating the minor's parents and or minor of their rights under the law. Although deceptive, this questionable approach to minor settlements could conceivably have a huge impact on the insurance industry as a whole if they are not careful. Bottom line, seek representation and allow the attorney to explain to you, as there is more to this, what the parents can do if their child was severely injured at a church event. My thought and prayers go out to the child and parents in this matter. Omitting the previously described circumstances, I hope all is well.

It sounds like the church set up a dangerous situation and a child was severely injured. Also, the lack of safety equipment available made things even more dangerous. The church can be held liable for the acts of those employees or other people acting on behalf of the church that caused this to occur. Almost all churches have liability insurance to cover this very sort of thing. Also if this happened on church property there probably is a type of insurance called medical payments ("med-pay") coverage that would pay for the medical expenses incurred by the victim's family. Get an experienced personal injury attorney immediately.

The parents should do all that they can to make sure their child gets better, not speak with any liability insurance adjusters or sign any statements and hire a personal injury in the area immediately.

The church is certainly liable. The school may be liable, also. You need to contact a personal injury attorney as soon as possible. Your attorney will need to review the documents which the parents signed to allow the child to participate and will also need to review the documents whereby the church rents the facility from the school. Good luck.

Generally the companies that rent the sumo suits requires supervision. They might find out who the rental company was to see what instructions were given to the church or whoever rented it. If the instructions were not followed, that may help on a claim for liability.n Also, the church and/or the promoters of the event may have obtained a certificate of insurance in order to hold the event. In that event, the carrier should be contacted and a claim made. The church may also have a general liability policy, in which case there is a good chance there is a med-pay provision which allows the carrier to pay medical bills up to the limits of that provision (usually $5000 or $10,000). In any event, the parents should hire a personal injury attorney who can assist in all areas of this claim.

The parents should immediately contact an injury attorney. It sounds like the child is facing life long challenges and needs an experienced attorney to investigate his claim and put together a life care plan to take care of the child. There are several issues that need to be investigated as soon as possible.

I am very sorry to hear about your son's injuries. You should immediately retain a personal injury attorney to preserve evidence and get witness statements while they are fresh. You should also start a daily activity journal of what you do and what your son does every day since the accident.

There is a possibility that the school/church can be held liable for negligence in supervising the children or providing an unsafe place to conduct the activity. IN order to proceed it must be determined that the church/school knew of the dangerous activity and failed to stop it. IN order to determine if there is a case, more facts must be ascertained.