Captain Hindsight Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/29/nyregion/29young.html?_r=1 Now I get that technically speaking that the 4 year and her parents were negligent. But at some point doesnt common sense have to come into play here? Shes 4 years old. Like really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WVUFootball29 Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 the only ruling is that she CAN be sued. Until she is actually brought to court and the suit goes before a judge it is still technically meaningless. Find me a judge that rules in favor of suing a 4 year old for negligence and I'll show you someone that needs to be hung by their toenails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted February 15, 2011 Author Share Posted February 15, 2011 the only ruling is that she CAN be sued. Until she is actually brought to court and the suit goes before a judge it is still technically meaningless. Find me a judge that rules in favor of suing a 4 year old for negligence and I'll show you someone that needs to be hung by their toenails. The fact it has gone this far makes me weep for the future...even with my hindsight abilities Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Judges ruling aside, their 87 year old mother dies of unrelated causes and yet these angry, bitter people are consumed with the ideal of suing toddlers? I hope the scumbag plaintiffs endure the worst life has to offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 the only ruling is that she CAN be sued. Until she is actually brought to court and the suit goes before a judge it is still technically meaningless. Find me a judge that rules in favor of suing a 4 year old for negligence and I'll show you someone that needs to be hung by their toenails. Well she is being brought to court. That's the point of the article. The ruling by the judge, Justice Paul Wooten of State Supreme Court in Manhattan, did not find that the girl was liable, but merely permitted a lawsuit brought against her, another boy and their parents to move forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cugalabanza Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 4 year old to judge: "Bring it on!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 4 year old to judge: "Bring it on!" LOL And maybe someone with more legal expertise could clear up, is this any different than the parents being sued? Are the people basically going through the 4 year old to get to the parents who did a crappy job at supervising their brats and letting them ride their bikes full speed into people? Who lets little kids with barely enough skills to maintain control of their bikes "race" down a busy city sidewalk? Typical modern parents who think that their child and them are the most important people on the planet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 I think the reason the judge is allowing it to go forward is that the parents were also named in the suit. That doesn't mean I agree with it. Sometimes accidents just happen. There is danger out there and sometimes it ends tragically. This doesn't mean it is anyone in particular's fault. Kind of like my industry. My clients can't sue me for market losses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts