wrongful death claim in Utah

2024See Bleazard, 2024 UT 17, ¶ 56 ; Summit County, 2024 UT 16, ¶ 43 ; see also Jensen v. IHC Hosps., Inc., 944 P.2d 327, 335 (Utah 1997) (stating that the decedent’s children could not bring a wrongful death claim because the decedent had a guardian at the time of her death and the relevant statute at the time only allowed such an action to be brought by a personal representative or guardian of the decedent); State Farm Mutual Auto.

2021A Defendant in a Wrongful Death Action Can Assert Defenses that Implicate the Viability of the Underlying Personal Injury Action ¶21 Given the semi-derivative nature of a wrongful death claim, Utah courts have analyzed on a case-by-case basis whether certain defenses applicable to the underlying personal injury claim can apply to a wrongful death claim. ―A wrongful death plaintiff is not exposed to all of the defendant‘s defenses, but rather is ‗subject to at least some of the defenses that would have been available against the decedent had she lived to maintain her own action.‘‖ Bybee, 2008 U

2021Eight years later, we reinforced Van Wagoner and Kelson, saying, ―Utah law is clear that a plaintiff in a wrongful death action is subject to defenses which could have been asserted against the decedent had he lived and prosecuted the suit.‖ Hirpa v. IHC Hosps., Inc., 948 P.2d 785, 794 (Utah 1997) (citing Kelson, 784 P.2d at 1155 ) (holding the Good Samaritan Act, which shields medical providers from liability when voluntarily lending aid in an emergency, provided a defense to a wrongful death claim).

2021Eight years later, we reinforced Van Wagoner and Kelson, saying, ―Utah law is clear that a plaintiff in a wrongful death action is subject to defenses which could have been asserted against the decedent had he lived and prosecuted the suit.‖ Hirpa v. IHC Hosps., Inc., 948 P.2d 785, 794 (Utah 1997) (citing Kelson, 784 P.2d at 1155 ) (holding the Good Samaritan Act, which shields medical providers from liability when voluntarily lending aid in an emergency, provided a defense to a wrongful death claim).

2024See Estate of Faucheaux v. City of Provo, 2019 UT 41 , ¶¶ 10–14, 449 P.3d 112 (explaining that Utah law “precludes an estate from bringing a wrongful death claim on its own behalf” and holding that a wrongful death claim “should be filed by the heirs of the decedent or by a personal representative of an estate on the heirs’ behalf”). ¶8 Following the hearing, Robert moved to amend the complaints in both cases to add himself and Jared’s mother as plaintiffs individually.

2024See Bleazard, 2024 UT 17, ¶ 56 ; Summit County, 2024 UT 16, ¶ 43 ; see also Jensen v. IHC Hosps., Inc., 944 P.2d 327, 335 (Utah 1997) (stating that the decedent’s children could not bring a wrongful death claim because the decedent had a guardian at the time of her death and the relevant statute at the time only allowed such an action to be brought by a personal representative or guardian of the decedent); State Farm Mutual Auto.

2021In Kelson v. Salt Lake County, we quoted Van Wagoner to hold that a defendant may assert a statutory defense of contributory negligence to a wrongful death claim. 784 P.2d 1152, 1155 (Utah 1989).

2021Eight years later, we reinforced Van Wagoner and Kelson, saying, ―Utah law is clear that a plaintiff in a wrongful death action is subject to defenses which could have been asserted against the decedent had he lived and prosecuted the suit.‖ Hirpa v. IHC Hosps., Inc., 948 P.2d 785, 794 (Utah 1997) (citing Kelson, 784 P.2d at 1155 ) (holding the Good Samaritan Act, which shields medical providers from liability when voluntarily lending aid in an emergency, provided a defense to a wrongful death claim).

2021A Defendant in a Wrongful Death Action Can Assert Defenses that Implicate the Viability of the Underlying Personal Injury Action ¶21 Given the semi-derivative nature of a wrongful death claim, Utah courts have analyzed on a case-by-case basis whether certain defenses applicable to the underlying personal injury claim can apply to a wrongful death claim. ―A wrongful death plaintiff is not exposed to all of the defendant‘s defenses, but rather is ‗subject to at least some of the defenses that would have been available against the decedent had she lived to maintain her own action.‘‖ Bybee, 2008 U

2019If the party who files and advances a claim has no cognizable injury, then that party may lack standing. _____________________________________________________________ 6 See Switzer v. Reynolds, 606 P.2d 244, 246 (Utah 1980) (explaining that the wrongful death statute was designed to compensate heirs for specific loses, not injuries suffered by the estate); In re Behm’s Estate, 213 P.2d 657, 660 (Utah 1950) (explaining that wrongful death is a separate and distinct cause of action for the benefit of the heirs, not the benefit of the estate); id. (explaining that the proceeds of wrongful death a

2019And this difference precludes an estate from bringing a wrongful death claim on its own behalf. ¶13 There is another reason why estates are precluded from filing wrongful death actions: “[T]he legislature intended that the proceeds obtained from the wrongdoer would not be intermingled with other assets of the estate of the deceased . . . [and] subjected to administration by [the personal representative] in the same manner as other estate assets.” Id. at 660 ; see also Switzer, 606 P.2d at 246 (“[T]he wrongful death statute created a new cause of action, which ran directly to the heirs.

2019If the party who files and advances a claim has no cognizable injury, then that party may lack standing. _____________________________________________________________ 6 See Switzer v. Reynolds, 606 P.2d 244, 246 (Utah 1980) (explaining that the wrongful death statute was designed to compensate heirs for specific loses, not injuries suffered by the estate); In re Behm’s Estate, 213 P.2d 657, 660 (Utah 1950) (explaining that wrongful death is a separate and distinct cause of action for the benefit of the heirs, not the benefit of the estate); id. (explaining that the proceeds of wrongful death a

2019A wrongful death claim is “a separate and independent cause of action and is not a continuation of the right of action of the injured party for personal injuries.” Id.

2019And this difference precludes an estate from bringing a wrongful death claim on its own behalf. ¶13 There is another reason why estates are precluded from filing wrongful death actions: “[T]he legislature intended that the proceeds obtained from the wrongdoer would not be intermingled with other assets of the estate of the deceased . . . [and] subjected to administration by [the personal representative] in the same manner as other estate assets.” Id. at 660 ; see also Switzer, 606 P.2d at 246 (“[T]he wrongful death statute created a new cause of action, which ran directly to the heirs.

2013See id. 17 To prevail on their claims of wrongful use of civil proceedings, the jury instructions required Appellants to show that the person initiating or continuing the wrongful death claim did not "reasonably believe[ ] in the existence of the facts upon which the claim is based" and did not "correctly or reasonably believe[] that under those facts the claim may be valid under applicable law." Appellants argue that two pieces of evidence support the jury's verdict that Jessica and Chelsea initiated or continued the wrongful death claim and that they did so knowing that the claim was invalid

2010Although the question presented on appeal in Moffitt v. Barr, 837 P.2d 572 (Utah Ct.App.1992), was whether the defendant's previously unplead-ed counterclaim was also saved by virtue of the application of the savings statute to the plaintiffs' claim, see id. at 573-76 , we observed that the savings statute "permits a plaintiff whose action has been dismissed on nonsubstantive grounds to file a new complaint within one year of the date of dismissal, if the dismissal has occurred after the statute of limitations for plaintiff's action has run," id. at 573 (emphasis added).

2010Although the question presented on appeal in Moffitt v. Barr, 837 P.2d 572 (Utah Ct.App.1992), was whether the defendant's previously unplead-ed counterclaim was also saved by virtue of the application of the savings statute to the plaintiffs' claim, see id. at 573-76 , we observed that the savings statute "permits a plaintiff whose action has been dismissed on nonsubstantive grounds to file a new complaint within one year of the date of dismissal, if the dismissal has occurred after the statute of limitations for plaintiff's action has run," id. at 573 (emphasis added).

2006See id. § 78-11-6 (establishing a parent or guardian’s cause oí action “for the death or injury of a minor child when the injury or death is caused by the wrongful act or neglect of another”); see also Dowling v. Bullen, 2004 UT 50, ¶ 14 , 94 P.3d 915 (characterizing a wrongful death claim as a derivative claim); Jensen v. IHC Hosps., Inc., 944 P.2d 327, 332 (Utah 1997) (same).

2006See id. § 78-11-6 (establishing a parent or guardian's cause of action "for the death or injury of a minor child when the injury or death is caused by the wrongful act or neglect of another"); see also Dowling v. Bullen, 2004 UT 50,¶14 , 94 P.3d 915 (characterizing a wrongful death claim as a derivative claim); Jensen v. IHC Hosps., Inc., 944 P.2d 327, 332 (Utah 1997) (same).

2006See Adkins v. Uncle Bart's, Inc., 2000 UT 14,¶¶36-37 , 1 P.3d 528 (holding that the wrongful death statute is fault-based and cannot merge with a strict liability offense to create a cause of action).

2006See Adkins v. Uncle Bart's, Inc., 2000 UT 14,¶¶36-37 , 1 P.3d 528 (holding that the wrongful death statute is fault-based and cannot merge with a strict liability offense to create a cause of action).

1999See Ammerman, 430 P.2d at 578-79 .