While to many people this makes me the worst kind of person, I will say that I can't judge this case without knowing all of the details on both sides. Like most legal cases the details are being kept quiet and will probably only appear in court, with lawyers on either end suggesting silence, or in the case of the family of the dead boy, just enough information to rally public sympathy.
The thing is that you can't really sue anyone for anything, and really lawyers will generally not represent people unless they think they have a case.
Looking at the situation here I'm guessing the dead kid was probably engaged in really reckless behavior, and might have had a reputation. I notice the comments being direct at him "and his friends" for being reckless bicyclists, and immediately this makes me wonder what those friends might have told the police when they responded to the scene, or what witnesses might have seen transpire. What's more there are also questions involved like whether there was a sidewalk they could have been using where the accident took place, and if they had instead chosen to ride their bikes in the middle of a street without a care in the world. Depending on where you are and the local laws this can be a BIG deal in a case like this. Depending on where you are in areas where bicyclists have to use the streets (if they haven't been banned locally) they are required to follow a lot of laws (hand signals, etc...) and can occupy a weird legal area.
I notice right off that the SUV driver is apparently not facing any criminal charges, which is important in connection with the above, and the details of the accident.
Given that the family is being sued, one has to wonder what the family might have done in their grief. If they went around blaming the SUV driver, calling them a monster, and rallying a local outcry against the driver once they were not charged with anything... well, then the driver DOES have every right to sue the family for defamation of character and harassment depending on how it was done. You generally speaking can't go around talking smack about someone, harassing them, trying to get them to lose their job, or whatever else, no matter how grief stricken you might be. My immediate guess is that this is what the case is going to come down to despite the way the article reads. Punitive damages can only go so far, and if a million dollars is being sought there has to be some kind of damage other than just the claimed "emotional suffering" for a lawyer to take the case (in real life). When it comes to blacklisting and harassment the legal system can get complicated since it comes down to the "value of missed opportunities". Basically if someone is screaming "murderer" in your workplace, and you miss a promotion (whether you would have gotten it or not) you can claim damages by saying those claims influenced the results... etc...
Time will tell if this goes anywhere, and if we ever get more details.
To be honest I think the issue is the way the article/reports spin it. I don't claim to *know* anything here, and a lot of people will probably jump on me yet again for being the messenger, but as a general rule if something like this goes to court it's usually not going to be as ridiculous as the media sometimes makes it sound. See, Lawyers want to get paid, and for all criticisms that can be leveled at them for being greedy and entirely mercenary, it does mean that unlike on TV/Movies and in "Urban Legends" that truly frivolous suits don't happen (even in the craziest seeming ones there is usually something to the claim), or at least not very often. No Lawyer is going to put hundreds of hours and however much in his own resources (investigators, etc..) into a case where he doesn't have any real chance of getting paid, unless of course the client is able to afford to pay them by the hour, which isn't likely the case here when your dealing with what is "only" a million bucks.
