Suppose your son or daughter goes out to a graduation party, has a few beers and later commits an act of vandalism on the other side of town. While all parents would like to think of their children as incapable of such behavior, could you be held liable for your child’s wrongful conduct? Maybe.
As early as 1967, the Pennsylvania Legislature attempted to address this issue with legislation imposing limited liability on the parents of a child found to have committed a tortious act in the Commonwealth. The current version, known as the “Parental Liability Act”, renders parents potentially liable for up to $1,000 per person injured as a result of the child’s wrongful act, to a maximum of $2,500 regardless of the number of persons who suffer injury.
These are the high points of the Parental Liability Act:
- li The term “child” is defined as an individual under the age of 18 years; parents are “off the hook” after age 17. li A “tortious act” is defined as a willful act resulting in injury. li “Injury” is defined to include personal injury or theft, destruction or loss of property. li “Parent” is defined to include both natural and adoptive parents.
While the Parental Liability Act places a cap on parental liability for the intentional tortious acts of a child, the common law can still impose greater liability in certain circumstances. For example, if a parent knowingly allows an intoxicated child to drive an automobile, resulting in injury to a third person, the parent can be liable to the third party for negligence in the full amount of the damage sustained. In certain cases, a parent has a duty of supervision of a child, especially young children or children with a known propensity for misbehavior. If the parent fails to supervise adequately the child’s activities, and a third party is injured, the parent can again have full liability for any damage caused by the child.
Historically, children under the age of 18 were presumed incapable of negligence. In modern times however, a rule has developed in Pennsylvania where a child under the age of seven is presumed incapable of negligence, and a child between the ages of seven and fourteen will have his or her conduct judged in comparison to ordinary children of like age. Whether such a child can be found negligent will depend upon whether a similar child can be found to have had an appreciation of the risk of the conduct involved. The trend, however, is to hold children responsible for their acts to the extent they can understand that an act is wrongful.