https://www.davidholublaw.com #IndianaLawyer #FightingForTruth<br /><br />Hi, I am Indiana personal injury attorney David Holub.<br />In our last video clip, we discussed a question from a caller who asked, “my son is 12 years old. He found some old boards around an abandoned building and built a ramp for his bike. The boards broke as he tried the ramp, and he fell and broke his nose and lost teeth. Can we sue?”<br />In the last video, we addressed property owner liability and attractive nuisance. <br />Not only did the boards break as the boy tried the ramp, but he placed the boards against a partially collapsed concrete wall on the property. <br />Instrumental in his injury was the collapsed concrete wall and the discarded boards, all of which were in an area open to people passing by unguarded by a fence<br />In this video, we focus on whether, under the law, a 12-year-old can be held to be contributorily negligent.<br />Contributory negligence used to be a complete bar to recovery in Indiana. <br />Now Indiana considers the fault of the plaintiff and defendant and compares the conduct of the two. <br />If the plaintiff is less than 50% at fault, the plaintiff may recover damages, but the damages recovered will be reduced by the percentage of fault of the plaintiff.<br />Indiana recognizes a rebuttable presumption that children between the ages of 7 and 14 are incapable of contributory negligence. <br />A rebuttable presumption is just that. The law presumes that a child between 7 and 14 cannot be at fault. But, the defense team at trial is allowed to prove that the child is nonetheless at fault.<br />A child under age 7 is flat-out presumed incapable of being at fault. The law gives no opportunity to dispute it. <br />So how might a defendant go about proving the caller’s 12-year-old son to be at fault? <br />Well, suppose there is evidence that the 12-year-old attended a bicycle training class. <br />Suppose further that the class instructor carefully explained the danger of running bikes up and down ramps. <br />Such evidence might very well convince a jury that the 12-year-old knew of the danger and was careless in going onto the property and building a ramp.<br />The evidence might be compelling if 10 children of the same age all attended the class. And the other 9 thought doing what the injured child did was too dangerous and refused to participate and rode their bikes home. <br />Sorry, there are no clear-cut answers in these cases.<br />To learn more about the Law Offices Of David W Holub visit https://davidholublaw.com today.<br /><br />To read David Holub's book "Fighting For Truth: A Trial Lawyer's Insight Into What It Takes To Win" visit https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1732468206/<br />
