How much responsibility???

[Tarranro]

What is the name of your state? CA
Here's how it goes. I was picking up my baby grandaughter from the sitters apartment complex. I was exiting through the driveway and was inching towards the street. As I was well in the slope of the driveway, a young boy, who happened to be racing bikes with his brother came barreling through, actually going down the slope in front of me to beat me, so to speak. Needless to say I hit him. I got out of the car to check to see if he was ok and he seemed fine. I asked him where his mom was and someone went to get her. She came out and I immediately gave her all my info. She said he seemed fine. It looked liked he had scraped 2 of his fingers on the ground. In the meantime after giving all my information I went home. Later on that evening I received a phone call from a gentleman who lived in the same complex. He told me that he got my name, number and information from the mother of the boy. The reason for his call, he said, was because when the boy fell of the bike, his bike hit the mans car some how and there was a scratch that he wants taken care of. I was baffled. I told him that I had called my insurance company and given them all the necessary information and he would have to go through them. He got frustrated and said someone has to pay for my scratches. Does this lie on me??

 

[seniorjudge]

Q: Does this lie on me?

A: Yes. You caused the accident.

 

[ForFun]

Does this lie on me??

Only if you negligently caused the accident. From your description, it sounds like the boy may have been negligent, in which case, the boy is liable for the scratches.

 

[Ohiogal]

Only if you negligently caused the accident. From your description, it sounds like the boy may have been negligent, in which case, the boy is liable for the scratches.

And since it appears the boy is a minor, the boy's parents are responsible for the scratches if a court upholds ForFun's reading of the incident.

 

[ForFun]

And since it appears the boy is a minor, the boy's parents are responsible for the scratches if a court upholds ForFun's reading of the incident.

Maybe, maybe not. It depends on whether the boy's actions constitute willful misconduct.

Traditionally, under the common law, the mere fact of a parent-child relationship was not a basis for vicarious liability. (Hagerty v. Powers (1885) 66 Cal. 368, 5 P. 622.) At common law, parental liability for a child's tort was imposed only when there was an agency relationship (see, e.g., Kallenberg v. Long (1924) 68 Cal.App. 317, 229 P. 57) or when the parent was himself or herself guilty in some way in the commission of the crime (see, e.g., Ellis v. D'Angelo (1953) 116 Cal.App.2d 310, 253 P.2d 675). [228 Cal.App.3d 1043] California followed this rule of nonliability for parents absent some fault by the parent or the application of a theory of vicarious liability until the enactment of section 1714.1 in 1955. 2​

The current version of that law is as follows:

1714.1. (a) Any act of willful misconduct of a minor which results
in injury or death to another person or in any injury to the property
of another shall be imputed to the parent or guardian having custody
and control of the minor for all purposes of civil damages, and the
parent or guardian having custody and control shall be jointly and
severally liable with the minor for any damages resulting from the
willful misconduct.​

The Court goes on...

As originally enacted, parental liability statutes were intended to make parents legally responsible for the tortious acts of their minor children and were generally aimed at acts of juvenile delinquency, vandalism and malicious mischief. Cynthia M. v. Rodney E., 279 Cal.Rptr. 94, 228 Cal.App.3d 1040 (Cal.App. 4 Dist., 1991)​

If the scratches were not maliciously made, or the result of other malicious behavior, I'm not so sure that the parents are liable.