context: Although parents may pursue their claims while the child's claim is barred due to minority, the claims of the parents are not derivative of their child's claim and may be barred while the child's is still assertable.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.parenthetical: holding that, although the statute of limitations ran on the parents' action, the child could bring action after majority was reached
citation_a.sentence: Id. at 88, 89 (citing Hathi v. Krewstown Park Apartments, 385 Pa.Super. 613, 561 A.2d 1261, 1262 (1989) (holding that parents were not entitled to use infancy tolling provisions and that the statute of limitations barred their claims)); see also Fancsali v. Univ. Health Ctr. of Pittsburgh, 563 Pa. 439, 761 A.2d 1159 (2000) (holding that, although the statute of limitations ran on the parents’ action, the child could bring action after majority was reached).
citation_b.signal: no signal
citation_b.identifier: 561 A.2d 1261, 1262
citation_b.parenthetical: holding that parents were not entitled to use infancy tolling provisions and that the statute of limitations barred their claims
citation_b.sentence: Id. at 88, 89 (citing Hathi v. Krewstown Park Apartments, 385 Pa.Super. 613, 561 A.2d 1261, 1262 (1989) (holding that parents were not entitled to use infancy tolling provisions and that the statute of limitations barred their claims)); see also Fancsali v. Univ. Health Ctr. of Pittsburgh, 563 Pa. 439, 761 A.2d 1159 (2000) (holding that, although the statute of limitations ran on the parents’ action, the child could bring action after majority was reached).