Rosario Perilli was out for a jog when he tried to pass 10-year-old girl on her bike. At the time she was riding with two of her friends. The three were riding abreast with the 10-year-old girl in question riding on the road, while her friends rode on the sidewalk. They were riding against traffic on the only side of the road with a sidewalk when the young girl noticed Perilli coming up behind them.
The young girl pulled in closer to the sidewalk at the time, but after glancing back once more she saw that Perilli had fallen back, so she pulled back away from the sidewalk a little further. At this point Perilli ran into the girl’s back wheel and fell, injuring his shoulder so severely he needed surgery.
Perilli, being such a stand up guy, decided to sue the 10-year-old girl for breaching the duty of care by contravening the Motor Vehicle Act laws. He also sued her grandparents for not teaching her how to ride her bike properly.
Yesterday, a judge found that he did not agree with Perilli’s case, and it was dismissed from court along with all his other allegations. The judge pointed out that the young girl should not be held to the same standards as an adult, and also that she had looked back in an attempt to accommodate Perilli’s attempt to overtake. He also pointed out that momentary lapses in judgement or attention are not the equivalent of negligence.
“A momentary lapse in awareness may be expected from children; such a lapse does not result in a finding of legal responsibility,” he told the court.
And in one last ruling that feels ever so slightly sassy, the judge pointed out that it was much easier for Perilli to be aware of what was in front of him than it was for the young girl to be aware of what was behind her.
“She acted with due care and attention and did not conduct herself in a manner that imperilled others or was the cause of Mr. Perilli's damages,” the Judge said.