Share This Page

Parents of infant who died at unlicensed Hampton daycare sue owners

| Wednesday, July 24, 2013, 1:45 p.m.

The parents of a 2-month-old boy who died when left alone in a crib for more than two hours filed a civil lawsuit in Allegheny County on Wednesday against the owners of an unlicensed Hampton day care center.

Ronald and Leanne Talik of West Deer sued as individuals and on behalf of the estate of Connor Patrick Talik, who died on Nov. 29, 2012, at the home of Edward and Lynn Schmidt, the day care operators.

According to the complaint, Leanne Talik took Connor to the Schmidts' home about 7:15 a.m. that day.

Lynn Schmidt placed Connor on his stomach in an upstairs bedroom at 8:30 a.m. and returned at 10:54 a.m. to find him not breathing and unresponsive.

Connor was transported by ambulance to UPMC Children's Hospital, where he was pronounced dead at 11:53 a.m.

The Taliks say the day care operators had a duty to keep their son safe and claim the Schmidts were negligent by placing Connor on his stomach, not checking on him, failing to promptly call 911 and for operating a day care center without a license.

They seek compensation for medical and funeral expenses, and emotional distress caused by their son's death.

The Schmidts could not be reached for comment.

Adam Brandolph is a Trib Total Media staff writer. Reach him at 412-391-0927 or abrandolph@tribweb.com.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.