Bill
H 3953
SC bill creates a civil action for loss of parent-child companionship, allowing unemancipated minors and parents to sue for damages for intentional or tortious interference.
Note on documents provided
- The packet you provided contains two different, unrelated draft measures: (A) a Massachusetts local bill filed by Rep. Kenneth Sweezey concerning denial, suspension, or revocation of local licenses/permits in the town of Hanson; and (B) a South Carolina-style draft that would add a statutory right for parental and filial consortium claims (adding Section 15‑75‑30 to the S.C. Code). This summary focuses on the parental/filial consortium language (the title you requested). A short note about the Hanson local permitting bill is appended at the end.
Purpose and intent
- Create an express civil cause of action allowing:
- an unemancipated minor to sue for damages arising from an intentional or tortious interference with the minor’s right to the companionship, aid, society, and services of a parent; and
- a parent or legal guardian to sue for damages from an intentional or tortious interference with the parent’s right to the companionship, aid, society, and services of his/her unemancipated minor child.
- The statute is intended to recognize and allow recovery for harms to family relationships (commonly termed consortium claims) in the parent–child context.
Key provisions
- Adds Section 15‑75‑30 to Chapter 75, Title 15 of the South Carolina Code (per the draft).
- Subsection (A): An unemancipated minor may maintain an action for damages for intentional/tortious violation of the minor’s right to the parent’s companionship, aid, society, and services. It bars recovery in that action to the extent the injured parent already recovered damages for the same loss.
- Subsection (B): A parent or legal guardian of an unemancipated minor may maintain a mirror action for violations of rights to the child’s companionship, aid, society, and services. It bars recovery to the extent the injured minor already recovered damages for the same loss.
- Trigger: applies to intentional or tortious violations (the draft does not define those terms or the scope/measure of damages beyond the listed interests).
- Effective date: takes effect upon approval by the Governor.
Who would be affected
- Plaintiffs: unemancipated minors and parents/legal guardians in South Carolina who claim loss of companionship, aid, society, or services because of an intentional or tortious act.
- Defendants: individuals or entities whose intentional or tortious acts interfere with the parent–child relationship — could include tortfeasors in accidents, intentional wrongdoers, or possibly health‑care or institutional actors depending on circumstances.
- Insurers, municipalities, employers and service providers faced with new or expanded wrongful‑relationship claims.
- Courts: trial and appellate courts will interpret statutory terms (e.g., scope of “companionship, aid, society, and services,” standards for intentional vs. tortious conduct, and measure of damages).
Procedural/timeline notes (from provided legislative actions)
- The draft identifies the statutory location (Section 15‑75‑30) and indicates immediate effectiveness upon gubernatorial approval.
- The legislative activity included hearings, committee reports, and multiple readings (dates listed in your file through 2025), indicating movement through the legislative process as of the supplied timeline.
Potential legal and practical implications
- Expands recognized bases for recovery in tort beyond the injured person’s direct damages to include the relational (consortium) losses of parents and children.
- The statutory bar against duplicate recovery narrows some risk of double recovery but may still raise questions about coordination of claims and allocation of damages between injured minors and their parents.
- Ambiguities (definitions, limits, damage formulas, applicable statutes of limitation) likely will require judicial interpretation and may lead to follow‑on litigation or clarifying legislation.
Brief note on the unrelated Massachusetts text in the packet
- The packet also includes a Massachusetts local bill (House No. 3953 filed 1/14/2025 by Rep. Kenneth P. Sweezey) concerning the town of Hanson’s authority to deny, suspend, or revoke local licenses and permits for failure to comply with conditions of approval. That measure is unrelated to parental/filial consortium claims and addresses municipal enforcement of building/permit conditions.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
