Courts v Gushee.

In this matter, I represented the parents (actually the mother and the Estate of the father) of a young man involved in a paintball incident at his home owned by his parents after school, when the parents were not present. One afternoon, several young men were "hanging out' after school.  One of them played around with a paintball gun and seriously hurt another young man.  The shooter was over the age of 18, but the other young men were all under the age of 18, including the boy who lived in the house.

The legal question was whether an under-age boy (under the age of 18) have a duty to supervise a young man who had reached the age of maturity (over the age of 18) while in the boy's house.  The Court held that the underage boy (technically a child in the law) was not responsible for the supervision of the young man. 

However, the remaining defendants, the mother and the Estate of the father, of the boy were held to have a duty to supervise the underage "children" playing or hanging out in the house,