Injuries to Children FAQs

Yes. A parent or legal guardian has the authority to hire a personal injury attorney and pursue a claim on behalf of an injured minor child. The child cannot file or settle their own claim because minors cannot enter into legally binding contracts under Oregon law. When the case resolves, either by settlement or verdict, additional court procedures apply to protect the child's recovery. Kaplan Law handles severe child injury cases involving traumatic brain injury, spinal cord injury, catastrophic burns, amputations, and other life-altering injuries caused by car crashes, truck accidents, defective products, and dog attacks. Because child injury cases involve both the child's claim and potentially a separate parental claim for medical expenses, it is important to work with an attorney experienced in Oregon's specific requirements for minor injury cases from the beginning.

Yes. When a drunk driver injures a child, Oregon dram shop law under ORS 471.565 allows a claim against the bar, restaurant, or other licensed establishment that served alcohol to the visibly intoxicated driver. Liquor establishments are required to carry at least $300,000 in mandatory liquor liability insurance, providing an additional and often substantial source of recovery alongside the claim against the driver. Oregon dram shop claims require formal written notice to the alcohol provider within 180 days of the injury, with one important exception for children: the notice requirement has an exception for injured minors, for those who are financially incapacitated, or for cases where the injured party cannot identify the alcohol provider. The claim against the drunk driver proceeds simultaneously with the dram shop claim and is entirely independent of any criminal DUI prosecution. If the driver was also served at multiple establishments, each may bear proportionate liability. In serious child injury cases involving drunk drivers, Kaplan Law investigates all available defendants and coverage sources, including dram shop claims, the driver's insurance, your family's UM/UIM coverage, and any other responsible parties.

Yes. Oregon product liability law holds manufacturers, distributors, and retailers strictly liable for injuries caused by defective products, regardless of whether the child or parent could have detected the defect. Defective car seats that fail in crashes, dangerous toys with small parts or toxic materials, defective playground equipment, malfunctioning strollers and baby products, and unsafe cribs and sleep products are all subject to product liability claims. Strict liability means you do not need to prove the manufacturer was negligent; you need only show the product was defective and caused the injury. In severe child injury cases involving defective products, product recalls, consumer complaint databases, and prior incident reports at the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) are important early evidence sources. Federal regulations and CPSC standards establish the safety baseline; violations of those standards support negligence per se arguments in addition to strict liability. Oregon's product liability statute of ultimate repose under ORS 30.905 is generally 10 years from the date of first purchase, but a significant plaintiff-favorable provision applies: Oregon's repose period extends to match the law of the state where the product was manufactured or, for foreign-made products, the state into which the product was imported. If that state has a longer repose period or no product liability statute of repose at all, Oregon's repose deadline extends accordingly. Because 32 states have no product liability statute of repose, many child injury claims involving products more than 10 years old remain viable in Oregon under this look-away provision, confirmed by the Oregon Supreme Court in Miller v. Ford Motor Co. (2018).

A certified life care planner is essential in any catastrophic child injury case. Because a seriously injured child may live for 70 or more years with their injury, the life care plan must project every future cost across a full life expectancy: medical treatment, surgeries, therapy, attendant care, adaptive equipment, home and vehicle modifications, psychological care, and educational support. A vocational rehabilitation expert also evaluates how the injury will affect the child's future earning capacity across their working lifetime. An economist then calculates the present value of all projected future costs. In child cases, these numbers are often the largest of any personal injury category because the projection period is so long. Oregon does not cap noneconomic damages in personal injury cases involving living plaintiffs, meaning pain and suffering, loss of quality of life, and disfigurement are fully recoverable without a statutory limit. Accepting any settlement before this work is complete almost always produces a recovery that will run out decades before the child's needs do.

Yes, in most serious injury cases. Oregon has specific procedures designed to protect injured children from settlements that do not adequately compensate them. If the net recovery to the child is $25,000 or less, a conservator is not required under ORS 126.725, but the settlement funds must be deposited into a federally insured savings account solely in the child's name and cannot be withdrawn until the child turns 18. If the net recovery exceeds $25,000, a conservator must be appointed by the court and court approval of the settlement is required before any funds can be distributed. The court reviews the settlement for fairness and reasonableness in light of the child's injuries and future needs, evaluates whether attorney fees are reasonable, and confirms how the funds will be protected. In catastrophic injury cases, structured settlements funded by annuities are frequently used because they can be tailored to match the child's anticipated future needs and provide tax-free income over a lifetime.

A conservator is a court-appointed person or institution authorized to manage the financial assets of a protected person; in child injury cases, the conservator manages the settlement or verdict funds on behalf of the injured child until the child reaches 18. In Oregon, a conservator is required when the net recovery to the child exceeds $25,000. A parent can serve as conservator, but this is not always advisable: if the parent was present at the time of the injury, the defendant may attempt to assign comparative fault to the parent's supervision, creating a conflict of interest. In those circumstances, a professional fiduciary such as a bank or trust company may be the better choice. The conservator must petition the court for appointment, disclose their financial situation and background, obtain court approval of the settlement, and file annual accountings showing how the funds were used on the child's behalf. In cases involving structured settlements, Kaplan Law works closely with annuity brokers to structure payments that serve the child's actual long-term needs and can sometimes eliminate the need for ongoing annual accountings.

A guardian ad litem (GAL) is a court-appointed person who represents the child's best interests in the litigation, but does not manage money. A GAL can be appointed to represent the child during the lawsuit and ensure the child's interests are independently protected, particularly when the parent's interests and the child's interests may diverge. A conservator, by contrast, manages the financial assets of the child and has the legal authority to approve settlements above $25,000 and manage settlement funds. In many child injury cases both are involved: a GAL participates in litigation decisions and a conservator manages the financial outcome. Appointment of a GAL is generally faster and less expensive than appointment of a conservator. However, a GAL alone cannot authorize a settlement of the child's claims above the $25,000 threshold; conservator appointment and court approval are still required for larger recoveries.

Oregon's statute of limitations for minor personal injury claims is tolled while the child is under 18, but the tolling is limited by ORS 12.160. The limitations period runs from the earlier of two dates: five years from the date of the injury, or one year after the child turns 18. This means a child injured at age 14 has until age 19 (one year after turning 18), but a child injured at age 6 has only until age 11 (five years from the injury), not until age 18 as many parents assume. Oregon's statute of ultimate repose under ORS 12.115 also applies and is not tolled by minority, creating an absolute outer deadline. For claims against government entities, Oregon's Tort Claims Act provides that the standard 180-day notice period is extended by up to 90 additional days during which the person is unable to give notice because of minority, making the effective notice deadline 270 days for an injured child under ORS 30.275(2). For wrongful death claims against government entities, the notice period is one year. Critically, while ORS 12.160 tolls the statute of limitations for minors, it does not toll the OTCA notice requirement itself; a child's right to pursue a government claim can be permanently lost within 270 days of the injury. The lawsuit itself must be filed within 2 years. For dram shop claims where alcohol was served to a minor, the notice requirement is 180 days, but an exception exists for injured children, those who are financially incapacitated, or where the injured child cannot determine the identity of the alcohol provider. Contact Kaplan Law immediately after any serious child injury; do not assume years remain.

Several avenues remain available even when the at-fault driver has no insurance. Oregon requires uninsured motorist (UM) coverage on every auto insurance policy, meaning your own family's auto insurer steps into the shoes of the at-fault driver and compensates the child for injuries, pain and suffering, and future costs up to your policy limits. If the at-fault driver was operating a vehicle owned by someone else, a negligent entrustment claim against the vehicle's owner may also be available. If the crash involved a defective vehicle component such as a failed seatbelt, airbag, or car seat, a product liability claim against the manufacturer provides an additional recovery source entirely independent of the driver's insurance status. In serious child injury cases where damages exceed available insurance, Kaplan Law investigates all potential defendants and all available coverage layers to ensure the child's recovery is not artificially limited by the at-fault driver's financial situation.