Barth v. Massa
146 Ill. Dec. 565, 558 N.E.2d 528, 201 Ill. App. 3d 19 (1990)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Parents are not liable for their minor child's tort under a theory of negligent supervision unless the plaintiff proves that the parents had notice of the child's specific propensity to commit the harmful act and also had the opportunity to control the child's conduct at the time the tort was committed.
Facts:
- Michael Massa, age 15, owned several BB and pellet guns with his parents' knowledge and permission.
- In September 1981, Michael and a friend were involved in an incident shooting BBs at other children from his backyard.
- Michael's mother, Sara Massa, was notified of the BB gun incident by a neighbor and a police officer, who also informed her it was not the first such occurrence.
- One to two weeks before the shooting, Michael secretly used his own money to purchase a stolen .9 millimeter handgun and other firearms, which he hid from his parents.
- On October 3, 1981, Michael and an accomplice burglarized a sporting goods store.
- While fleeing the scene of the burglary, Michael Massa shot and wounded Fairview Heights police officer Robert C. Barth with the stolen handgun.
Procedural Posture:
- Plaintiff Robert C. Barth filed suit in an Illinois trial court against Michael Lee Massa and his parents, Maynard and Sara Massa.
- At trial, the parents' motions for a directed verdict were denied.
- The trial court entered a directed verdict in favor of the plaintiff against defendant Michael Massa on the counts of negligence and willful and wanton misconduct.
- The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff against all three defendants (Michael, Maynard, and Sara) for $130,000.
- The defendants' post-trial motions were denied by the trial court.
- All three defendants appealed the judgment to the Illinois Appellate Court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Are parents liable under a theory of negligent supervision for their minor child's tort when they were unaware the child secretly possessed the firearm used, the child's prior misconduct was of a much lesser severity, and they had no opportunity to control the child at the time of the incident?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Chapman
No. Parents are not liable for their minor child's tort under a theory of negligent supervision if they lacked specific notice that the harmful act was likely to occur and had no opportunity to control the child's conduct at the time of the tort. The court first dismissed the theory of negligent entrustment, as Maynard and Sara Massa could not entrust a weapon they did not know their son possessed. Turning to negligent parental supervision under Section 316 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts, the court found neither of its two essential elements were met. First, the parents did not have sufficient notice; knowledge of a prior incident involving a BB gun was not enough to put them on notice that their son was likely to acquire a stolen handgun, commit a burglary, and shoot a police officer. Second, the parents lacked the opportunity to control their child's conduct. The shooting occurred away from the home, and the parents were unaware of their son's criminal plans or that he was armed, meaning they lacked the ability to control him at the time of the incident as required by law.
Analysis:
This case reinforces the high bar for establishing parental liability for the torts of a minor child in Illinois. It narrowly construes the doctrine of negligent parental supervision by requiring a strong connection between the child's prior misconduct and the specific tort that caused the injury. The decision clarifies that general knowledge of a child's misbehavior is insufficient; parents must have notice of a propensity for the specific type of harmful conduct at issue. Furthermore, it strictly applies the requirement that parents must have a contemporaneous opportunity to control the child, effectively shielding parents from liability for torts their children commit secretly and away from their presence.
