Bailey v. C.S. - 12 S.W.3d 159 (Tex. App. 2000)

Rule:

The legislature has set a minimum age limit for willful and malicious conduct only, not intentional torts. There is currently no specific age at which minors are immune from liability for intentional torts as a matter of law.

Facts:

Appellee, a four-year-old, unexpectedly struck appellant, the babysitter, in the throat. Appellant sustained injuries. Appellant filed suit against the parents and appellee alleging appellee's actions were intentional and constituted a battery. Appellants moved for summary judgment on the claims against appellee on the grounds that appellee, at age four, was incapable of negligent or intentional conduct as a matter of law. Appellee's only evidence to support his claim that he was incapable of the intent required for battery was his age. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of appellee without specifying a ground for the judgment. Appellant challenged the decision. 

Issue:

Was the appellee entitled to summary judgment on the sole basis of his minority?

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

The court held that appellee's minority, standing alone, was insufficient to establish as a matter of law that he lacked the requisite intent to commit a battery. There was currently no specific age at which minors were immune from liability for intentional torts as a matter of law. Appellee failed to meet his burden of proof, and the trial court erred in rendering summary judgment.