Minnesota’s Parental Responsibility Statutes

Understanding a parent’s or legal guardian’s possible culpability in Minnesota for a minor’s “willful wrongdoing” or carelessness.

A parental responsibility legislation may hold parents and/or guardians financially liable for the harm caused by their unemancipated underage children. In certain areas, parents are only jointly accountable for their child’s purposeful and/or malicious behavior. In certain areas, even an accident committed by a juvenile may make a parent financially liable for the following damages.

Minnesota has a variety of laws that may be used to hold a parent responsible for the behavior of a child. Continue reading for more information.

What are the Parental Responsibility Laws in Minnesota?

Minnesota’s parental responsibility rules apply to the following types of child behavior:

Property damage (under Minnesota Statutes section 540.18), bias offenses (under Minnesota Statutes section 611A.79), and theft are all included (covered by Minnesota Statutes section 604.14).

Minnesota, like other states, sets the age of majority at 18. As a result, these regulations only apply to custodial parents/guardians of children under the age of 18.

Minnesota Parental Liability for Property Damage and Bodily Injury

According to Minnesota Statutes § 540.18, if a juvenile knowingly or maliciously causes property damage or physical harm, the parent or guardian with whom the youngster is living is also accountable, unless the adult has custody under the authority of Human Services or the state.

The injured person may recover from the parent/guardian and the child jointly or individually since liability is joint and several. However, no matter how severe the injury or how large the property damage caused by the youngster, the parent’s financial culpability is limited to $1,000. That’s a fairly low bar.

Keep in mind that Section 540.18 only applies to injuries and damage caused by the minor’s intentional or malicious conduct. This implies that this rule cannot be utilized to hold a parent accountable if a youngster causes a vehicle accident or other incident due to carelessness or negligence. To some degree, the youngster must have behaved with intent.

In Minnesota, parental liability for a minor’s bias offenses exists.

Bias offenses are crimes committed against someone because of their race, color, gender, sexual orientation, handicap, or national origin. Section 611A.79 of the Minnesota Statutes holds parents and guardians liable for bias crimes committed by young children, up to $5,000, for any damages resulting from the offense, including injuries and medical bills.

However, liability may be avoided if the parent or guardian makes reasonable steps to exert control over the minor’s actions.

In Minnesota, parental liability for a minor’s theft exists.

Of course, anybody may be held accountable for stealing goods. In Minnesota, in addition to criminal penalties, there is a pecuniary penalty of $50 or 100% of the value of the stolen goods, whichever is greater, for each theft conviction.

In addition to personal accountability, Minnesota Statutes § 604.14 holds parents or guardians financially liable for thefts committed by their underage children. Because liability is not restricted under this clause, a parent or guardian may be held liable for the whole worth of the stolen goods.

In Minnesota, parents may still be liable under common law.

Even if Minnesota’s parental responsibility rules do not apply, parents may be held liable for their children’s activities under “common law,” which is a collection of principles that is independent of state law or court rulings.

The Restatement of Torts, a “common law” source, gives an excellent explanation of a parent’s legal duty when it comes to their young children:

“A parent has a duty to exercise reasonable care to control his minor child so that it does not intentionally harm others or conducts itself in such a way that creates an unreasonable risk of bodily harm to them, if the parent (a) knows or has reason to know that he has the ability to control his child, and (b) knows or should know of the necessity and opportunity to exercise such control.”