Jennifer Connell went viral this week after it was revealed that she filed a $127,000 lawsuit against her 12 year-old nephew.
Now Connell wants the public to know that she only pursued the litigation because her insurance company left her with “no choice” but to seek damages against the boy, who considers her an “aunt” despite being the son of a cousin.
The 54 year old had broken her wrist in 2011 after Sean Tarala, the birthday boy, jumped off a bicycle and ran into her arms for a hug, which caused her to fall over and break her wrist.
The incident was allegedly “caused by the negligence and carelessness of the minor defendant in that a reasonable eight year old under those circumstances would know or should have known that a forceful greeting such as the one delivered by the defendant to the plaintiff could cause the harms and losses suffered by the plaintiff.”
After social media exploded with outrage, she has since reemerged to blame her actions on the insurance industry.
"This was meant to be a simple homeowners’ insurance case," she told CNN by phone. "Connecticut law is such that I was advised by counsel that this is the way a suit is meant to be worded."
While Connell originally stated that she wanted the “very loving, sensitive” boy to be responsible for his actions, her lawyers later reversed that stance. They expressed that she had “no choice” but to file a suit since her insurance company was only willing to commit $1 for her treatment and recovery.
The legal team also maintains that Connecticut law dictates that anyone who files an injury claim with an insurance company must “take the responsible party to court,” forcing her to name the nephew as a defendant, according to the NY Post.
In the end, the jury took less than an hour to deliberate, ruling in favor of the young boy. Connell’s lawyers say she accepts the decision, but wishes that insurance companies hadn’t made a trial necessary in the first place.
“She didn’t want to do this any more than anyone else would. But her hand was forced by the insurance company,” they said in a statement. “We are disappointed in the outcome, but we understand the verdict.”
