Who is responsible if a minor injured another minor? 28 Answers as of February 20, 2012

A 17 year old boy shot a 5 year old boy intentionally with bb gun. The bb hits 5 year old in eye. There is damage to his eye. Is the 17 year old or parents responsible?

Ask a Local Attorney. 100% Anonymous. Free Answers.

Free Case Evaluation by a Local Lawyer: Click here
A. Daniel Woska & Associates, P.C.
A. Daniel Woska & Associates, P.C. | Dan Woska
A minor in Oklahoma is a person of sound mind who is less than 18 years old today. A minor with parents and living at home is under a legal disability in the eyes of the law. The minor cannot be legally responsible for his own negligence until he is an adult at 18. The parents, the policy of insurance your parents may have purchased and the facts must be ascertained before the legal analysis can take place. The legal analysis will involve the 17 year old and the adult parents and the policy of insurance.
Answer Applies to: Oklahoma
Replied: 9/1/2011
Law Office of Jared Altman
Law Office of Jared Altman | Jared Altman
The parents could be liable for negligent entrustment of a dangerous instrumentality to their Son. Also, the minor is responsible. If there is homeowners insurance then it may be worthwhile pursuing.
Answer Applies to: New York
Replied: 8/25/2011
David Hoines Law
David Hoines Law | David Hoines
the 17 year old certainly and probably the parents, depending on the facts call me if you want to discuss
Answer Applies to: Florida
Replied: 8/24/2011
Patrick M Lamar Attorney
Patrick M Lamar Attorney | Patrick M Lamar
I believe the minor and the parents are liable here. The parents may have a cap of $1,000.00 but homeowners insurance might cover this if it was not intentional.
Answer Applies to: Alabama
Replied: 8/24/2011
Law Office of Ronald Arthur Lowry
Law Office of Ronald Arthur Lowry | Ronald Arthur Lowry
Aside from the criminal implications the 17 year old is responsible for his own actions in civil matters, too. that means he can be held liable in a court of law for damages. Most people have homeowners' insurance that would provide liability insurance coverage to any household member that is sued, so there should be insurance that would cover the 17 year old's actions. The parents are probably not liable themselves unless they did something to facilitate the injury.
Answer Applies to: Georgia
Replied: 8/24/2011
    Law Office of Michael E. Hendrickson
    Law Office of Michael E. Hendrickson | Michael E. Hendrickson
    Yes, the parents might be responsible for the apparently willful tort(civil wrong) of their son as described but more relevant facts would be necessary to say with greater certainty.
    Answer Applies to: Virginia
    Replied: 8/24/2011
    The Kelly Law Firm, P.C.
    The Kelly Law Firm, P.C. | L. Todd Kelly
    There are a lot more questions that I would want answered, but the 17 year old MAY be liable on those facts.
    Answer Applies to: Texas
    Replied: 8/24/2011
    Bulman Law Associates PLLC Injury Law Firm
    Bulman Law Associates PLLC Injury Law Firm | Thomas Bulman
    The child is responsible for his actions at age 17. Criminal charges should be explored with law enforcement. If the parents knew and allowed their son to act carelessly with the gun, they may be responsible. Their home insurance may be a source of recovery but this it is very complicated to pursue such a claim. You should consult an attorney before doing anything.
    Answer Applies to: Montana
    Replied: 8/24/2011
    Allen Murphy Law
    Allen Murphy Law | W. Riley Allen
    Both. A 17 year can certainly be held responsible for his own negligence and his parents can be as well through their homeowners' insurance carrier assuming he lives at home.
    Answer Applies to: Florida
    Replied: 8/24/2011
    Paul Whitfield and Associates P.A.
    Paul Whitfield and Associates P.A. | Paul L. Whitfield
    Parents are generally not liable for the torts of their children,. To get the parents involved you would have to show that they encouraged this type behavior in some way. Sue the 17 year old when he gets 18 and you may get a judgment he will someday have to pay (with interest) to clear his credit (when he wants to buy a car or a home etc).
    Answer Applies to: North Carolina
    Replied: 8/24/2011
    Barry Rabovsky & Associates
    Barry Rabovsky & Associates | Barry Rabovsky
    We would be happy to provide you with a free consultation if you call my office at either of the numbers listed below. If my office accepts your case, there is no fee charged unless we are able to obtain a settlement for you. Thank you for your email, and we look forward to hearing from you.
    Answer Applies to: Illinois
    Replied: 8/24/2011
    Bernard Huff, Attorney/Mediator
    Bernard Huff, Attorney/Mediator | Bernard Huff
    In many cases the parents are responsible negligent acts of their children. You may want to consult with an accident or personal injury attorney.
    Answer Applies to: Indiana
    Replied: 8/24/2011
    Andrew T. Velonis, P.C.
    Andrew T. Velonis, P.C. | Andrew Velonis
    It is the 17 year old who is responsible.
    Answer Applies to: New York
    Replied: 8/24/2011
    Law Offices of Andrew D. Myers
    Law Offices of Andrew D. Myers | Andrew D. Myers
    Such a case would be extremely fact specific. A useful analysis would require many more facts than a line or two posted on the internet. Any legal thoughts based only on this information would be theoretical in nature only and that is not what you need.
    Answer Applies to: New Hampshire
    Replied: 8/24/2011
    Kelaher Law Offices, P.A.
    Kelaher Law Offices, P.A. | James P Kelaher
    The parents' homeowners insurance policy will probably provide coverage for the minor resident of the household.
    Answer Applies to: Florida
    Replied: 8/24/2011
    Law Office of Mark J. Leonardo
    Law Office of Mark J. Leonardo | Mark Leonardo
    Both are responsible. The parents liability is limited to a statutory amount.
    Answer Applies to: California
    Replied: 8/24/2011
    Coulter's Law
    Coulter's Law | Coulter K. Richardson
    The 17 year old is definitely responsible. However, the 17 year old likely has few assets of his own. The parents, only to the extent they knew about the 17 year olds' behavior and did nothing about it are responsible. If the parents were unaware of the conduct on that day or unaware of their son's violent tendencies, they are likely not liable. As an intentional act, it would not be covered by insurance.
    Answer Applies to: New Jersey
    Replied: 8/24/2011
    R. D. Kelly Law Firm, P.L.L.C.
    R. D. Kelly Law Firm, P.L.L.C. | Robert Kelly
    The main person legally responsible for a wrongful act is the person (if any) who acted wrongfully. If the person was a minor, the minor owes the injured party for the damages. Of course, many minors are judgment-proof due to insufficient assets and minors can sometimes avoid debts by declaring bankruptcy, too. RCW 4.24.190 establishes an action against parents for willful injury to person or property by a minor by saying the following:"The parent or parents of any minor child under the age of eighteen years who is living with the parent or parents and who shall willfully or maliciously destroy or deface property, real or personal or mixed, or who shall willfully and maliciously inflict personal injury on another person, shall be liable to the owner of such property or to the person injured in a civil action at law for damages in an amount not to exceed five thousand dollars. This section shall in no way limit the amount of recovery against the parent or parents for their own common law negligence. [1996 c 35 2; 1992 c 205 116; 1977 ex.s. c 145 1; 1967 ex.s. c 46 1; 1961 c 99 1.]
    Answer Applies to: Washington
    Replied: 8/24/2011
    Klisz Law Office, PLLC
    Klisz Law Office, PLLC | Timothy J. Klisz
    The 17year old. But, their parents homeowners insurance may cover the claim if it was "accidental".
    Answer Applies to: Michigan
    Replied: 8/24/2011
    Lyle B. Masnikoff and Associates
    Lyle B. Masnikoff and Associates | Lyle B. Masnikoff
    Yes. Both will be responsible.
    Answer Applies to: Florida
    Replied: 8/23/2011
    Cantor & Burger
    Cantor & Burger | Gary K. Burger
    Yes, they are responsible. You have a claim against the parents homeowners policy for negligence. They should pay past and future medical and pain and suffering and any lasting disability.
    Answer Applies to: Missouri
    Replied: 8/23/2011
    LT Pepper Law
    LT Pepper Law | Luke T. Pepper
    The parents would be responsible for the injuries. There would need to be an investigation as to assets and insurance.
    Answer Applies to: Pennsylvania
    Replied: 8/23/2011
    Magnuson Lowell P.S.
    Magnuson Lowell P.S. | Richard S. Lowell
    Certainly, the 17 year old is responsible. The parents would also be responsible for at least $5000. That's because, by statute, a parent is responsible for the intentional injury inflicted by a minor child upon another - for up to $5k. However, a parent can also be responsible for the intentional acts of a child if it can be proved that the parent negligently provided the gun to the child - knowing that the child posed a risk to others of intentionally shooting others.
    Answer Applies to: Washington
    Replied: 8/23/2011
    Holzer Edwards
    Holzer Edwards | Kurt Holzer
    The 17 year old is. However, he may be insured by the parents homeowners insurance coverage if the injuries were in fact negligent and not intentional if he intended for example to only scare the younger child.
    Answer Applies to: Idaho
    Replied: 8/23/2011
    Ewusiak & Roberts, P.A.
    Ewusiak & Roberts, P.A. | Christopher J. Roberts
    The answer depends on the specific circumstances surrounding the incident, and the history of the 17 year old. The 17 year old is clearly responsible himself for any injury caused to the 5 year old, given that he apparently shot him intentionally. The parents are not automatically responsible for the actions of their child, but they could be found to share responsibility under some circumstances. For example, if they contributed to the incident by making the gun available to the 17 year old despite a history of violent behavior, that could make them liable. You should talk to a lawyer who can help you determine the potential claims (and defenses) in light of all the pertinent facts.
    Answer Applies to: Florida
    Replied: 2/20/2012
Click to View More Answers:
12 3 4 5 Free Legal QuestionsConnect with a local attorney