Also known as: parent child immunity · parental immunity · child-parent immunity
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A common-law doctrine that bars an unemancipated minor from bringing a tort action against a parent for ordinary negligence arising from the exercise of parental authority, supervision, or discretion within the family relationship. The doctrine rests on preserving family harmony and parental autonomy. Modern jurisdictions have largely abolished or sharply limited the doctrine so that the parent-child relationship alone does not create tort immunity.
Portia Price directed her twelve-year-old daughter to operate an old tractor without a roll bar near a steep ditch on the family property. The tractor overturned and injured the child. The daughter, through a guardian, sued Price for negligence in assigning the dangerous task. Because the conduct involved the exercise of parental supervision, the court applied the doctrine and dismissed the suit.
Pierce Patterson, operations manager at a metal shop, disabled a safety guard on a punch press and directed his sixteen-year-old daughter to operate the machine after hours to speed production. The daughter's hand was crushed. She sued Patterson for negligence. The court held that the parent-child relationship alone supplied no immunity and allowed the claim to proceed on ordinary tort principles.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Modern tort law has rejected broad parental immunity. The mere existence of the parent-child relationship does not create a categorical bar to suit. A parent remains subject to ordinary negligence standards unless the specific conduct falls within a limited sphere of protected parental discretion such as reasonable discipline or supervision.
Supporting sources
Immunity survives only in narrow circumstances involving the exercise of parental authority, supervision, or discretion within the family relationship. Courts distinguish these privileged parenting decisions from ordinary negligence that occurs in commercial or non-parental settings.
Supporting sources
When a parent's conduct occurs in a commercial setting and creates hazards tied to business operations rather than core parenting functions, the relationship supplies no immunity. Ordinary negligence standards govern and the claim proceeds.
Supporting sources
…interspousal immunity in automobile negligence cases); France v. A.P.A. Transport Corp. , 56 N.J. 500 (1970) (abolishing parent-child immunity in automobile negligence cases) (no subsequent legislative action on issue of familial immunity). We are satisfied that our decision today is well within the competence of the judiciary.…