Violation of Swimming Pool Code Causing Death Of A Child
$300,000 (.30 million) (policy limits) Violation of Swimming Pool Code
causing death of a small child. Orange County adopted a model Swimming
Pool Code that required child-resistant, one-way locks to all doors
leading through residential swimming pool enclosures (which allow doors
to open from the inside, but not from the outside). The stated purpose
of the law is to deny small children access to unsupervised pool areas
where they could drown.
The homeowner’s pool enclosure and its locks were originally built
to code. But, because the one-way locks also operated to deny the adult
homeowner access to her own pool from the backyard, she permanently
disabled the locks to the doors leading through the pool enclosure by
completely breaking off the locking mechanism. This act defeated the
purpose of the pool code and rendered her unsupervised pool accessible
to small children.
On July 4th, although she knew the child could not swim, the
homeowner invited the child over for a swimming party. The homeowner
knew that the locks to the doors leading through the pool enclosure
were broken off, but concealed that fact from the child’s mother. As a
result, the homeowner also knew that the child could secretly access
her unsupervised pool from the backyard, but also concealed that fact
from the child’s mother. The homeowner then helped dress the child in a
new swim suit and watched the child cry because she wanted to go
swimming. The homeowner watched the child’s mother tell the child that
she could not go swimming until later when the adults went with her.
Thus, the homeowner knew the child’s mother did not want the child to
go swimming. Finally, the homeowner watched the mother send her child
(wearing her new swimming suit) next door with her older sister. Still,
the homeowner concealed from the child’s mother that, due to the
homeowner’s violation of law, the child could secretly gain access to
her unsupervised pool from the backyard (out of the view of all adults).
Within minutes the child was found floating face down in the
homeowner’s pool. The insurance company of the homeowner blamed the
child’s mother for failing to guard against a secret danger she did
not, and could not know about (and that the homeowner did know about)
and therefore denied all responsibility for the accident until the day
before trial.
