미국법상 未成年者의 不法行爲에 關한 責任 - 미성년자와 부모의 책임을 중심으로 -
Liability for Torts of Minor Children in the U.S. : Parental Liability for Torts of Minors
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This article explores liability for torts of minor children in the United States. In the United States, there have been three major stages in the development of jurisprudence regarding parental civil liability. The first stage is the traditional common law. At common law, parents were not responsible for the torts of their minor children. In fact, throughout jurisdictions embracing common law jurisprudence, the parent-child relationship, alone, is not a sufficient ground for enforcing civil liability against parents for the tortious acts of their minor children. However, the fact that minors typically do not have sufficient assets to pay for their actions led the change of formation of the parent liability law in the area. The second stage is an exception to the common law tradition, enumerated in the Restatement (Second) of Torts, section 316, which holds parents liable, in certain circumstances, for the torts of their minor children. The Restatement test concentrates on parents' ability to control their children and focuses on the necessity and opportunity to exercise parental control. The third stage is the creation of state statutes that hold parents liable for specific conducts of their minor children. Statutorily defined parental responsibility laws have expanded the common law by making parents liable for torts of their minor children. These statutes enforce a form of strict liability on the parents where the common law does not. And they intends to compensate the victims of the torts of children, and to encourage parents to better discipline their children.
Abstract
This article explores liability for torts of minor children in the United States. In the United States, there have been three major stages in the development of jurisprudence regarding parental civil liability. The first stage is the traditional common law. At common law, parents were not responsible for the torts of their minor children. In fact, throughout jurisdictions embracing common law jurisprudence, the parent-child relationship, alone, is not a sufficient ground for enforcing civil liability against parents for the tortious acts of their minor children. However, the fact that minors typically do not have sufficient assets to pay for their actions led the change of formation of the parent liability law in the area. The second stage is an exception to the common law tradition, enumerated in the Restatement (Second) of Torts, section 316, which holds parents liable, in certain circumstances, for the torts of their minor children. The Restatement test concentrates on parents' ability to control their children and focuses on the necessity and opportunity to exercise parental control. The third stage is the creation of state statutes that hold parents liable for specific conducts of their minor children. Statutorily defined parental responsibility laws have expanded the common law by making parents liable for torts of their minor children. These statutes enforce a form of strict liability on the parents where the common law does not. And they intends to compensate the victims of the torts of children, and to encourage parents to better discipline their children.
참고문헌 (28)
- 박준서, (2004), 한국사법행정학회
- 곽윤직, "채권(11)" (2005), 박영사
- 곽윤직, "채권각론, 제6판" (2003)
- 법무부, "민법(재산편)개정자료집" (2004)
- 민법 제755조의 개정에 관한 연구, "이창현", 법무부, ~ (2010)
- 강봉석, "미성년자와 그 부모의 책임 - 책임능력 있는 미성년자의 불법행위에 대한 부모의 책임을 중심으로 -", 홍익법학, 13(1), pp.349~370 (2012), 법학연구소
- 남윤봉, "미성년자의 불법행위와 감독자의 책임", 법학논총, 14 (1997), 한양대학교 법학연구소
- 서광민, "미성년자의 불법행위에 대한 책임 : 불법행위법 개정안 의견서", 민사법학, (15) (1997)
- 정상현, "책임능력있는 미성년자의 불법행위와 감독자책임", 영남법학, 7(1.2) (2001)
- 조규창, "미성년자의 불법행위에 대한 친권자의 책임 -민법 제755조와 대법원 판례의 고찰-", 판례연구, 2 (1983), 고려대학교 법학연구원
- American Law Institute, "Restatement (Second) of Torts", ~ (1965)
- American Law Institute, "Restatement (Third) of Torts: Phys. & Emot. Harm", ~ (2010)
- Dan B. Dobbs, "Torts and Compensation: Personal Accountability and Social Responsibility for Injury (5th ed.)" (2005)
- Dan Dobbs, "The Law of Torts", ~ (2000)
- Kenneth S. Abraham, "The Forms and Functions of Tort Law (3d ed.)" (2007)
- W.Page Keeton, "Prosser and Keetonon Torts(5thed.)" (1994)
- Andrew C. Gratz, "Increasing the Price of Parenthood: When Should Parents Be Held Civilly Liable for the Torts of Their Children?", Hous. L. Rev, 39, pp.169~ (2002)
- Carl David Adams, "Note, Has the Family Code Made Any Changes in the Liability of a Parent for His Child's Conduct?", Baylor L. Rev, 26, pp.687~ (1974)
- Ellenmarie Shong, "The Legal Responsibility of Parents for Their Children's Delinquency", Fam. L.Q, 6, pp.145~ (1972)
- Eve M. Brank, "Parental Responsibility Statutes: An Organization and Policy Implications", J.L. & Fam. Stud, 7, pp.1~ (2005)
- Gilbert Geis, "Sins of Their Children: Parental Responsibility for Juvenile Delinquency", Notre Dame J.L. Ethics & Pub. Pol'y, 5, pp.303~ (1991)
- Kenzo Takayanagi, "Liability without Fault in the Modern Civil and Common Law", Ill.L.R, 16, pp.163~ (1921)
- Linda A. Chapin, "Out of Control? The Uses and Abuses of Parental Liability Laws to Control Juvenile Delinquency in the United States", Santa Clara L. Rev, 37, pp.621~ (1997)
- M. Harold Dwyer, "Note, Parent and Child: Liability of Parent for the Torts of Minor Child", Cornell. L. Q, 19, pp.64~ (1933)
- Patrick Kelley, "Infancy, Insanity, and Infirmity in the Law of Torts", Am. J. Juris, 48, pp.179~ (2003)
- Randall K. Hanson, "Parental Liability for Torts of Children: Balancing the Rights of Victims and Parents", Midwest L. Rev, 9, pp.77~ (1990)
- Rhonda V. Magee Andrews, "The Justice of Parental Accountability: Hypothetical Disinterested Citizens and Real Victims’ Voices in the Debate Over Expanded Parental Liability", Temp. L. Rev, 75, pp.375~ (2002)
- Robert Charles Levine, "Parental Liability for the Torts of Their Minor Children: Limits, Logic & Legality", Nova L.J, 9, pp.205~ (1984)