Are Utah Parents Responsible When Their Child Causes an Injury?

In most personal injury cases, a plaintiff seeks compensation directly from the person who harmed them. But Utah, like most states, uses special rules when a minor injures someone or damages their property. Parents in the state can sometimes be held financially responsible for the actions of their child—but there are significant limits on the scope of this responsibility. If you're a Utah parent, or you think you're entitled to compensation for harm caused by a child, make sure you know how these rules apply to you.

When Utah Parents Can Be Held Liable for Negligence

Under Utah's common law, everyone is obligated to avoid endangering people through carelessness, or through dangerous acts. People who harm others with their negligent behavior could be financially responsible for the resulting injuries or property damage.

This general obligation to avoid negligent conduct can sometimes make parents legally responsible for their children's harmful acts. This kind of liability can only apply if a child harms someone:

• because a parent carelessly permitted or enabled the child's dangerous behavior, or
• because the parent carelessly permitted the child to use a car, a weapon, or some other item that the child could not handle safely.

However, Utah courts generally assume that everyone is fully responsible for their own behavior—including children. Therefore, this kind of liability is only rarely imposed on parents, and only in serious cases. (Utah does have several laws that explicitly impose liability on parents in certain situations, and therefore make it easier to hold parents responsible for their children's conduct. We'll discuss those rules later in this article.)

Parental Liability for Negligent Supervision

A parent could be liable for "negligent supervision" if they carelessly allow their child to engage in dangerous behavior, and this behavior injures someone or damages their property. To impose this kind of liability, a court must evaluate both the child's and the parent's behavior.

The child's serious misconduct. Before a court looks at the parent's behavior, it must first decide if the child:

• harmed someone intentionally, or
• acted in a way that created an unreasonable risk of harm (in other words, acted negligently).

If the child's behavior doesn't fit either of those descriptions then the parent can't be liable for negligent supervision.

Utah's courts don't have a specific rule for judging a child's behavior in these kinds of cases. But Utah's supreme court has noted that, when courts in other states impose liability for negligent supervision, it tends to be in cases where the child has engaged in "egregious" behavior. For example, the state supreme court mentioned cases where children:

• committed murder
• committed arson, and
• seriously injured people in violent attacks.

In addition, it can be challenging for a victim to prove that a child's behavior was negligent. Children are held to a more lenient standard than adults. When an adult is accused of negligence, the question is whether they behaved at least as responsibly as a reasonable adult would have in the same situation. For a child, the question is whether they behaved the way children "of the same age, intelligence and experience" would have behaved.

The parent's irresponsibility. Utah has never defined exactly what a parent must do (or fail to do) in order to be liable for negligent supervision. But states with similar rules usually impose liability only if the parent:

• knew (or should have known) that their child was behaving dangerously
• was in a position to stop or address the child's behavior, and
• failed to take reasonable steps to control their child.

This applies, for example, to situations where a parent is with their child, sees their child doing something dangerous, and ignores the behavior. It is much more difficult to impose liability on parents who aren't around when their child does something dangerous. In those situations a victim usually has to prove that:

• the child had repeatedly engaged in a specific dangerous behavior
• the parents knew about the dangerous behavior, but did not take reasonable steps to deal with it, and
• the victim was injured by that dangerous behavior.

So, for example, if a parent sees their child playing with matches, and ignores it, they could be liable for negligent supervision. But if the child sets a fire when the parent is not present, the victim would have to prove that the parent was aware of the child's ongoing habit of playing with matches or setting fires.

(Donovan v. Sutton, 2021 UT 58 (Utah 2021).)

Parental Liability for Negligent Entrustment

Parents can also be liable if they allow their child to possess or use a "dangerous instrumentality."

A dangerous instrumentality could be an item that is risky for anyone to handle—or example, dynamite. But it could also be anything the child isn't capable of using safely. For example, parents who know that their child is a reckless driver could be liable for negligent entrustment if they let their child keep driving, and the child causes an accident. This logic could apply to any item (like a hunting rifle or a baseball bat) that has a lawful use, but that the child has shown they cannot handle safely.

Note that, in addition to these civil penalties, parents can also face criminal liability if they allow their children to own or use dangerous weapons. These criminal laws include exceptions designed to allow minors to use weapons for things like hunting. But these exceptions don't apply if the minor:

• uses the weapon to commit a crime
• uses the weapon without parental permission, or
• has been found guilty of a violent crime in adult or juvenile court.

In addition, children 13 and under must be supervised by a parent or responsible adult while using a dangerous weapon.

(Herland v. Izatt, 2015 UT 30; Utah Crim. Code § 76-11-211 (2025).)

Damages in a Parental Negligence Case

If a parent is found liable for negligence, then they are legally required to pay the victim's damages.

Many states have laws that limit the amount of damages a plaintiff can receive in a personal injury lawsuit. Utah's personal injury laws cap damages in medical malpractice cases, as well as in cases where someone sues the government. But in most negligence lawsuits, including parental negligence cases, Utah law allows a successful plaintiff to recover all of their damages. This compensation can include:

• Economic damages. Direct financial consequences like medical bills or the cost of property repairs.
• Non-economic damages. Harder-to-quantify consequences like the pain and suffering caused by injuries.
• Punitive damages. Money awarded to a plaintiff to punish a defendant for particularly outrageous or malicious behavior.

Note that the laws we'll discuss below—which impose parental liability in specific situations—take a different approach to damages. Those laws all cap the amount of money parents can be ordered to pay victims. This could be important for victims who are trying to decide whether to file a negligence lawsuit, or to seek compensation under one of the laws we'll discuss next.

Parental Liability for a Child's Driving

Two laws in Utah's civil code directly address parents' legal responsibility for car accidents caused by their children.

Liability Created by Signing a Child's License or Permit Application

Under Section 53-3-211 of Utah's civil code, a minor applying for a driver license or learner permit must have a parent or guardian sign the application. (If no parent or guardian has legal custody, a "responsible adult" can sign the minor's application.)

The person who signs the minor's application shares legal responsibility for any damage the minor causes while driving. This is called joint and several liability, and it means the victim has the option of seeking all of their compensation from the parent (or other adult who signed the minor's application).

There are two important limits on parental liability under this law.

Victims cannot ask for punitive damages. Normally the plaintiff in a negligence case can seek both compensatory damages (money for economic losses and for pain and suffering) and punitive damages (money to penalize especially bad behavior). But Section 53-3-211 does not entitle victims to seek punitive damages from an adult who signs a minor's driver license or learner permit application.

Compensation cannot exceed Utah's minimum auto insurance requirements. Utah (like all states) requires every driver to be covered by an auto insurance policy. State law sets minimum amounts of money that a driver's policy must be able to pay out in various situations. For example, in 2024, drivers had to carry enough insurance to cover up to $15,000 in property damage.

These minimum insurance requirements set limits on how much compensation a victim can seek under Section 53-3-211. So, for example, even if a victim has suffered $20,000 in property damage, they cannot use Section 53-3-211 to get more than $15,000 in compensation. In addition, Section 53-3-211 does not apply at all if a minor is covered by an insurance policy that meets Utah's minimum legal requirements.

(Utah Code § 53-3-211 (2025); Utah Code § 31A-22-304 (2025).)

Liability for Allowing a Child to Use a Vehicle

Under Section 53-3-212 of the Utah Civil Code, parents can also be held liable for their child's negligent driving if:

• they own a car and let their child drive it, or
• they give their child a car.

Like the liability created by signing a minor's license or permit application, this form of liability:

• is joint and several (meaning a victim can collect their damages entirely from the parent)
• does not apply if the minor is covered by an auto insurance policy that meets Utah's minimum requirements, and
• is limited by the minimum policy limits set by state law.

This law is similar to the rule for negligent entrustment that we discussed above. However, it differs in two important ways:

• Parents can be liable under Section 53-3-212 just for providing their child with a car to drive. In a negligent entrustment lawsuit, the victim must be able to prove that the parents knew their child was a dangerous driver.
• In a negligent entrustment lawsuit, a successful plaintiff is entitled to compensation for the full amount of their damages. Under Section 53-3-212, compensation is limited to what the victim could have received if the minor had been covered by a bare-bones auto insurance policy.

(Utah Code § 53-3-212 (2025).)

Parental Liability for a Child's Theft or Property Damage

Two sections of Utah's civil code make parents financially liable, in certain situations, if their children steal, damage, or destroy property. (This civil financial liability is in addition to any criminal consequences that could apply to a child or parent who breaks the law.)

Note that a child does not actually need to be found guilty of a crime for parents to be held liable under these rules. A victim can sue in civil court and present evidence that the child's behavior is covered by the rules we'll discuss in this section.

Liability When a Child Steals, Damages, or Destroys Property

Under Section 80-6-10, parents can be held liable, up to a $2,000 limit, if their child:

• intentionally steals, destroys, or damages property (including with graffiti)
• damages a vehicle (including a boat, car, or train) by recklessly shooting or throwing a projectile at it
• recklessly endangers human life by illegally tampering with property, or
• recklessly and illegally interrupts public utility service.

The limit for parental liability increases to $5,000 if the child did any of those things in connection with a street gang.

Utah courts can waive this liability if there is a good reason to do so. Specifically, the law allows courts to waive some or all of a parent's liability if the parent:

• made a reasonable effort to restrain their child's wrongful behavior, and
• (if possible) reported the child's conduct either to the property owner or to the police.

Note that the requirement to report the child's conduct only applies if: the parent knows about it, and the child was not caught before the parent could report the behavior. So, for example, a court might still waive liability for a parent who did their best to prevent their child from damaging property, and then finds out that their child has been arrested for vandalism.

(Utah Code § 80-6-610 (2025).)

Additional Parental Liability for Shoplifting

Section 78B-3-108 of the civil code deals more specifically with parental liability for shoplifting—including shoplifting through theft, robbery, burglary, or fraud. A child and the child's parents are jointly and severally liable if the child commits (or attempts to commit) any of these acts. Liability includes:

• actual damages
• the retail price of stolen merchandise, plus a penalty ranging from $50 to $500
• court costs and attorney fees.

A parent is exempt from liability under this law if:

• they made a reasonable effort to stop the child's behavior, and
• (if possible) reported it either to the merchant or to the police once they learned of it.

Note that the requirement to report a child's conduct only applies if the minor was not apprehended by the police, the merchant, or anyone acting for the merchant. In other words, a parent who does their best to stop their child from shoplifting, but then finds out that their child has been arrested for shoplifting, can still avoid liability even though they didn't have a chance to report their child's crime.

(Utah Code § 78B-3-108 (2025); Utah Code § 76-6-404 (2025).)

Learn More About Utah's Parental Responsibility Laws

Utah parents should understand when and how they could be liable for the actions of their children. And anyone who's been harmed by a minor should understand their rights under Utah law. As we've seen, Utah gives victims several options for pursuing compensation from parents, but also places significant limits on this kind of liability. If you have questions about your own situation, consider seeking out an attorney who knows Utah law and has experience with cases like yours.