## Facts

- During the 1969 deer season, Jerry Purtle (age 16) and Kenneth (“Bubba”) Shelton, Jr. (age 17) hunted as guests at a deer camp in Union County, Arkansas.
- Before daylight, the camp owner transported the youths to their hunting area; Shelton’s deer stand was near a road, while Purtle’s stand required walking through woods.
- The camp owner warned the youths to make their presence known while walking in the woods and not to shoot without knowing the target was a deer.
- Purtle had difficulty locating his stand and moved toward Shelton’s stand without announcing his presence.
- Shelton fired a 30.06 rifle at what he believed was a deer; the bullet apparently struck a tree, fragmented, and shrapnel ricocheted into Purtle, seriously injuring both of Purtle’s eyes.
- Purtle’s father sued on behalf of Purtle, naming Shelton, Jr. as the shooter and Shelton, Sr. on a derivative theory.

## Issues

1. Whether a 17-year-old engaged in deer hunting with a high-powered rifle must be held to an adult standard of care rather than the ordinary minor standard (reasonable minor of similar age and intelligence).
2. Whether the trial court erred by instructing the jury under the minor standard of care for Shelton, Jr., affecting the comparative-fault verdict.

## Decision

- The Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed the judgment for the defendants.
- The trial court properly instructed the jury to apply the minor standard of care to Shelton, Jr.
- The court declined to extend the adult-standard exception used for minors operating motor vehicles to hunting with a high-powered rifle.
- Because the jury assigned equal fault to Purtle and Shelton, Jr., comparative negligence resulted in no recovery, and no instructional error required reversal.

## Legal Principles

- A minor’s negligence is generally measured by the care a reasonably careful minor of similar age and intelligence would use in similar circumstances.
- A minor is held to an adult standard of care only when the activity is both (1) dangerous to others and (2) normally undertaken only by adults.
- Motor-vehicle cases applying an adult standard to minors rest not solely on dangerousness, but also on features such as licensure and regulatory policy; that rationale does not automatically apply to recreational hunting.
- The fact that an activity is dangerous does not alone justify abandoning the general minor standard where minors commonly engage in the activity.

## Conclusion

The court held that teenage deer hunting with a high-powered rifle, though dangerous, is not an activity normally undertaken only by adults; therefore, a 17-year-old hunter is judged under the ordinary minor standard of care, and the defense verdict based on equal comparative fault stood.


Purtle v. Shelton, 251 Ark. 519, 474 S.W.2d 123 (Ark. 1971)