A mother and father’s worst nightmare is receiving a call from the hospital informing them that their child has been involved in an accident. While the physical and emotional suffering from such an event can never be set right by money, a lawsuit against the person at fault may be in the child’s best interests. Handled properly, this type of case almost always results in fair compensation for the child.

   While most people feel sympathy for injured children, don’t expect obtaining financial compensation to be simple. In an automobile accident case, for example, the insurance companies typically take the position that the child ran suddenly into the street and that the driver had no chance to react. The insurance companies refer to these cases as "pedestrian dart-out" cases. By labeling it this way, the insurance companies hope to create the impression that there was no way for the driver to avoid the accident. Personal injury lawyers, on the other hand, refer to these kinds of cases as "pedestrian knock down" cases. You can clearly see the image which your attorney hopes to create by using that label.

   Regardless of what it is called, the best hope for litigation success when a child is hit by a car is a prompt and thorough investigation of the accident scene. The vital factors include the type of neighborhood where the accident happened, the length of time the child was visible to the motorist, and the age of the child. It is important to photograph the scene of the accident shortly after it occurs if the photos will help to prove that the area was one in which children are likely to be present. Nearby playgrounds, schools, or shops that cater to children should be photographed since these put the motorist on notice that cautious driving is required. Traffic signs that warn motorists to watch for children must be photographed for the same reason.

   If it can be proven that the child was visible to the motorist for more than a second or two, the chances for success in this litigation are greatly improved. The adult motorist is presumed to have the capacity to take steps to protect the safety of the child, and he or she must take them promptly in order to avoid responsibility on this claim. Children are often presumed incapable of negligence due to their tender years. The younger the child is, the stronger this presumption generally becomes.

   Thus, if a 6-year-old is struck by a car, this child will almost certainly receive compensation for the injuries suffered in the accident. A 12-year-old has a much weaker presumption of non-negligence than does a 6-year-old. Yet even the 12-year-old is not held to the same standard of care as the adult driver. That’s a very good reason why these cases are so easy to win when handled properly.

   Similar rules apply to other accidents involving children, such as an injury on a dangerous piece of property or an injury in a playground. The sooner you take pictures of the scene and get information from witnesses about the situation at the time of the accident, the better.

   Juries, judges, and arbitration panels have special sympathy for children. They are much more likely to return large awards for children than they are for adults. Many feel that greed is the primary motivation when adults sue for personal injuries. This factor is far less prominent in the minds of jurors, judges, and arbitrators when it is a child who is injured.

   In automobile cases, the medical bills resulting from the child’s injuries are paid by the automobile insurer for the parents of the child. If there is no insurance in the household, the insurance for the driver has to pay these bills.