Are you a dependent stepchild or parent seeking compensation in a California wrongful death case? This article explains your rights and the importance of seeking legal representation to ensure you receive the full compensation you deserve.
In California, the right to sue for the wrongful death of another is a statutory right, not one that arises from common law. “Because it is a creature of statute, the cause of action for wrongful death exists only so far and in favor of such person as the legislative power may declare.” Justus v. Atchison (1977) 19 Cal.3d 564, 575.
What amounts to “standing” to recover damages in wrongful death actions is governed by Code of Civil Procedure Section 377.60. That statute permits a cause of action for wrongful death to be asserted by, among others (emphasis added):
“…any of the following persons or by the decedent’s representative on their behalf:
(a) The decedent’s surviving spouse, domestic partner, children, and issue of deceased children, or, if there is no surviving issue of the decedent, the persons, including the surviving spouse or domestic partner, who would be entitled to the property of the decedent by intestate succession.
(b) Whether or not qualified under subdivision (a), if they were dependent on the decedent, the putative spouse, children of the putative spouse, stepchildren, or parents. ….
California courts also look closely at how dependency is established. For stepchildren who were not legally adopted, financial dependence usually means reliance on the decedent for necessities such as housing, food, clothing, or general financial stability. In some cases, a minor child under 18 may qualify if the child lived in the decedent’s household for at least 180 days before death and received at least one-half of his or her support from the decedent.
In another article posted on this blog, I have discussed analytical problems related to determining the dependency of stepchildren, for purposes of their potential recovery for damages for wrongful death under this statute. Here, I want to address a different, but related issue: assuming the plaintiff’s counsel can establish the financial dependence of stepchildren, parents, a putative spouse, or children of a putative spouse under the statute, what is the extent of their potential recovery for damages: is it economic damages only (i.e., sums necessary to compensate them to the extent of the dependence); or is it the full measure of economic damages recoverable by a plaintiff, under the statutory scheme (i.e., economic damages and non-economic damages for the lack of care, comfort, and society of the decedent)?
Parents may also qualify in more than one way. If the decedent died without surviving children, parents may have standing as heirs through intestate succession. But if the decedent left surviving issue, a parent seeking to join the wrongful death case generally must prove financial dependency on the decedent. In some situations, legal guardians who were financially dependent on the decedent may also raise similar standing issues.
Under Code of Civil Procedure 377.61, which sets forth the recoverable damages for wrongful death, it has been held that: “A plaintiff in a wrongful death action is entitled to recover damages for his pecuniary loss, which may include (1) the loss of the decedent’s financial support, services, training and advice, and (2) the pecuniary value of the decedent’s society and companionship—but he may not recover for such things as the grief or sorrow attendant upon the death of a loved one, or for his sad emotions, or the sentimental value of the loss.” Nelson v. County of Los Angeles (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 783, 793, emphasis in the original.
Still, many plaintiffs’ attorneys have had something like this occur: after convincing defense counsel that a parent or stepchild meets the aforementioned statutory, and case law, requirement to prove he or she was “dependent” on the decedent, they are met with a request to submit a claim for damages that includes only a request for compensation to the extent of that financial dependency, but excludes claims for non-economic damages. This is an incorrect assumption on the issue of entitlement to damages, which should be challenged by plaintiffs’ counsel.
That response should be that case law makes clear that a dependent parent or stepchild is entitled to the full measure of statutory damages, not just to economic damages that compensate for the loss sustained related to the dependency.
Although the issue is little explored, one authority states just that. See, Perry v. Medina (1987) 192 Cal.App.3d 603, 608, abrogated on other grounds by Saldana v. Globe-Weis Systems Co. (1991), internally quoting Riley v. California Erectors, Inc. (1973) 36 Cal.App.3d 29, 32, emphasis added: “[O]nce financial dependency is shown, then the parent may recover ‘for the loss of that child’s comfort and society, and subsequent protections which the child may afford to the parent, provided these elements are considered in reasonable relation to pecuniary loss.’”
In these cases, proof matters. A dependent stepchild or parent should be prepared to show not only that the defendant’s wrongful act caused the death, but also that the claimant was financially dependent on the decedent. Helpful evidence may include tax returns, bank records, proof of shared household expenses, rent or mortgage payments, school or medical expense records, and other documents showing regular support.
Dependency is not always evaluated in a rigid snapshot limited to the exact date of death. Depending on the facts, courts may examine the family’s financial relationship over a broader period to determine whether real and ongoing support existed.
Another important procedural rule is California’s single action rule. In most wrongful death matters, all eligible heirs and dependents must join in one lawsuit arising from the death. There is also a statute of limitations that generally requires filing within two years of the date of death, so delay can create serious problems for otherwise valid claims.
Perhaps the frequency of defense counsel’s frequent misapprehension of this rule arises from the fact that questions concerning the entitlement to statutory recovery by a “dependent” parent or stepchild do not arise that frequently. But when they do, the answer is clear. Counsel should assure that claimants whose standing arises under the “dependency” prong of the wrongful death statute obtain the full measure of damages to which they are entitled, and working with an experienced wrongful death law firm can help ensure that these rights are fully protected.
Wrongful death cases involving dependents can be complex and emotionally challenging. It’s crucial to have knowledgeable legal advocates on your side who understand the nuances of California law and will fight for your rights. If you’re a dependent stepchild or parent seeking compensation in a wrongful death case, don’t hesitate to contact GJEL Accident Attorneys for a free consultation. We’ll help you understand your rights, navigate the legal process, and pursue the full measure of damages you deserve.
