Holy crap, I don't know what's more freakout-able: that two 4-year-olds riding their training wheel bikes on an East Side sidewalk, knocked over an 87-year-old neighbor, who died three weeks months later from complications related to hip fracture surgery.
Or that the woman's estate [update after NYT correction: first her, then her son] would sue not just the parents, but the 4-year-olds, for negligence.
Or that there is apparently nothing newer than a 1928 case--an era, DT reader DT points out, when Science brought us "thriving state-run eugenics programs"--that the judge used to determine that a 4-year-old is a "reasonably prudent child" and thus mentally and developmentally capable of even acting with something like "negligence."
Or that the judge's decision to let the case proceed against the kid [the other kid apparently did not contest] said that there's no evidence at all to "indicate that another child of similar age and capacity under the circumstances could not have reasonably appreciated the danger of riding a bicycle into an elderly woman," No evidence beyond that fact that the kid is four years old, of course.
I'll have to go with D, All of the above.
Actually, she died 3 MONTHS after the incident (NY Times corrected themselves). And it was her that initiated the suit, then her son took it over after her death.
It's very sad, and ridiculous.