Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Juvenile Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

PDF

Michigan Law Review

Liability

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Juvenile Law

Negligence - Breach Of Duty - Standard Of Care Required Of Infant Defendants, Dale Van Winkle Feb 1955

Negligence - Breach Of Duty - Standard Of Care Required Of Infant Defendants, Dale Van Winkle

Michigan Law Review

One of the defendants, a child four years and eight months of age, while playing with infant plaintiff, threw a stone which struck a bottle near where plaintiff was standing. A chip of glass Hew from the bottle into the eye of plaintiff, resulting in injury. The action was brought by infant plaintiff's father individually and as guardian ad litem against infant defendant's father individually and as guardian ad litem. The trial court denied infant defendant's motion for summary judgment. On appeal, held, reversed and remanded with directions to dismiss the complaint as to infant defendant. The authorities do …


Torts - Infant's Liability For Battery - Parent's Liability For Child's, Richard S. Weinstein Jan 1954

Torts - Infant's Liability For Battery - Parent's Liability For Child's, Richard S. Weinstein

Michigan Law Review

Plaintiff, a baby sitter, suffered injuries when she was pushed violently to the floor by her four-year-old charge. Plaintiff brought an action against the child alleging battery and negligence, and against the parents alleging negligence in failing to warn plaintiff of the boy's habit of violently attacking people. The lower court sustained demurrers to all three counts. On appeal, held, reversed on the first and third counts. An infant may be charged with battery, and a parent may be negligent in failing to warn of an infant's violent tendencies. Ellis v. D'Angelo, 116 Cal. App. (2d) 310, 253 …


Infants - Minority As A Defense To Rescission For Fraud, Raymond H. Rapaport Jun 1941

Infants - Minority As A Defense To Rescission For Fraud, Raymond H. Rapaport

Michigan Law Review

Two defendants, one of whom was a minor, sold a business to the plaintiff. The plaintiff, in seeking to rescind the contract on the ground that it was induced by fraud, obtained a decree declaring the contract cancelled, and judgment was entered against the defendants for the sums they had received from the plaintiff. The minor defendant filed a petition to vacate the judgment as to him because during the trial no guardian ad litem had been appointed to represent him. Held, defendant is entitled to a new trial only if he could have made a good defense, and …