Understanding a parent’s or legal guardian’s possible culpability in South Dakota for a minor’s “willful wrongdoing” or carelessness.
Parents and/or legal guardians may be held financially liable for damages caused by a minor child’s purposeful or malicious behavior under parental responsibility statutes. In certain areas, parents are even held accountable if their children cause an accident, such as a vehicle collision. In this article, we’ll look at South Dakota’s parental responsibility rules, including when parents may be held legally liable for their child’s actions, as well as the financial boundaries of such duty.
Table of Contents
Where Can I Find the Parental Responsibility Laws in South Dakota?
South Dakota’s parental responsibility legislation may be found in S.D. Codified Laws sections 25-5-15 and 25-5-23.1.
South Dakota, like other states, sets the legal age of majority at 18. As a result, these rules only apply to custodial parents/guardians of children under the age of 18 at the time the underlying offense was committed.
Parental Liability for Willful Behavior
Parents who have custody of a kid are civilly responsible under South Dakota Codified Laws § 25-5-15 if the child intentionally or knowingly causes physical harm or property damage. The definition of “willful” is critical. A person’s activity is typically considered “willful” if he or she wants to (1) conduct the particular action and/or (2) create a certain consequence. For instance, if a toddler pitches a baseball, his actions are deemed “willful.” If the baseball strikes a window, it may be necessary to demonstrate that the youngster meant to strike the window.
Section 25-5-15 states that victims are not restricted to persons. Businesses, churches, and localities may all file a lawsuit against a parent for damages caused by a child.
In South Dakota, there are financial limits on a parent’s liability.
Section 25-5-15 restricts the responsibility of parents to $2,500 plus court fees. As an example, if a youngster causes $5,000 in property damage, the victim may only collect $2,500.00 from the child’s parents. The victim might try to reclaim any outstanding sums directly from the minor. However, in most cases, this will be a fruitless exercise.
In addition, liability is confined to “actual losses.” Actual damages are defined as out-of-pocket costs. In the case of physical harm, this is often the amount of medical expenditures incurred. For property damage, it is the cost of repairing or replacing the destroyed property. Actual losses do not include non-economic damages such as pain and suffering recompense.
Another essential point to remember is that parents may petition the court if they believe they should not be held liable for any of their child’s losses. These arguments are addressed on a case-by-case basis, but the parents will almost certainly have to provide a very strong argument, i.e. they made considerable steps to prevent their kid from doing something, and the youngster did it anyhow.
There is no application to car accidents.
Section 25-5-15 does not apply to injuries sustained by a child while driving a motor vehicle. So, if a youngster causes property damage or physical harm while driving a vehicle, insurance is likely to be the sole source of compensation. Minors are normally covered by their parents’ insurance, therefore it is not usually an issue.
There is no liability for foster parents.
Foster parents are not accountable for the behavior of their foster children, according to South Dakota Codified Laws § 25-5-23.1, whether such actions are negligent, deliberate, or malicious. A foster may, however, be held accountable under “common law,” as detailed below.
In South Dakota, parents may still be liable under “common law.”
Even if South Dakota’s parental responsibility statutes do not apply, parents may be held liable for their children’s acts under “common law,” which is a non-statutory set of legal concepts accumulated through time.
In essence, parents who are aware that their kid has a proclivity to behave in a particularly harmful way may be obliged to take reasonable precautions to avoid the child from causing foreseeable injury to others.
Assume parents are aware that their kid comes home from school every day and smashes golf balls across the neighborhood from the back yard. If a parent permits this conduct to continue and the youngster ruins a home or injures someone with an errant golf ball, the parent is likely to be held liable for the damages.
