Kerins v. Lima

Mass. Dist. Ct., App. Div.

Kerins v. Lima

1996 Mass. App. Div. 114, 1996 Mass. App. Div. LEXIS 49

CourtMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division

DecidedJune 24, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 1996 Mass. App. Div. 114 (Kerins v. Lima) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts District Court, Appellate Division primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kerins v. Lima, 1996 Mass. App. Div. 114, 1996 Mass. App. Div. LEXIS 49 (Mass. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Martin, RJ.

This matter arises from an arson fire set by the juvenile foster child of the defendants (Lima). The child was placed in the Limas’ home by reason of an agreement with D.S.S. There is nothing in the record to indicate who had legal custody. We may, from the facts, infer that the Limas had physical custody. The plaintiff is seeking redress against the Limas on the basis of M.G.L.c. 231, §85G. M.G.Lc. 231, §85G holds parents responsible for the wilful acts of a child under the age of 15 which results in injury or death to another. The Trial Justice allowed the defendants’ motion to dismiss and we affirm

The juvenile was in the Lima home as part of the statutory scheme of M.G.L.c. 119, §21, to provide temporary care for homeless children. The Limas were paid to care for the juvenile by the Commonwealth. There is no language in the statute or elsewhere that indicates that the temporary care giver should be liable for the conduct of a temporary foster child or be made an insurer therefor. We, therefore, affirm.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Martin, RJ.

This matter arises from an arson fire set by the juvenile foster child of the defendants (Lima). The child was placed in the Limas’ home by reason of an agreement with D.S.S. There is nothing in the record to indicate who had legal custody. We may, from the facts, infer that the Limas had physical custody. The plaintiff is seeking redress against the Limas on the basis of M.G.L.c. 231, §85G. M.G.Lc. 231, §85G holds parents responsible for the wilful acts of a child under the age of 15 which results in injury or death to another. The Trial Justice allowed the defendants’ motion to dismiss and we affirm

The juvenile was in the Lima home as part of the statutory scheme of M.G.L.c. 119, §21, to provide temporary care for homeless children. The Limas were paid to care for the juvenile by the Commonwealth. There is no language in the statute or elsewhere that indicates that the temporary care giver should be liable for the conduct of a temporary foster child or be made an insurer therefor. We, therefore, affirm.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1996 Mass. App. Div. 114, 1996 Mass. App. Div. LEXIS 49, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kerins-v-lima-massdistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack