Was the child not yet born at the time of the misrepresentations, or also at the time of the lawsuit? If it's just the former, it's not much different from the fairly common type of lawsuit where children sue doctors for malpractice that occurred when the child was still a fetus in the womb (I'm assuming, of course, that the employer's misrepresentations related to matters material to the child's interests).
On Thu, 25 Sep 2003, Gregg Miller wrote: > The NY Appellate division ruled a child not yet born can sue for > misrepresentations made to her mother by her mother's employer. I wonder if > this is going to have an effect on the rights of the unborn. > > http://www.law.com/jsp/printerfriendly.jsp?c=LawArticle&t=PrinterFriendlyArt > icle&cid=1063212087448 > > Gregg P. Miller > Academic Support Tutor > Thomas Jefferson School of Law > 2121 San DIego Avenue > San DIego, CA 92110 > (619) 297-9700 ext. 1408 >
