Davis v. Happyland Toy Co.

Outline:

• In a wrongful death action, both the deceased and the surviving spouse or personal representative are considered “parties” for all evidentiary purposes.
• Whenever the defendant offers statements of either the decedent or the spouse, such statements qualify as an opposing party’s statement and are not hearsay.
• A surviving spouse in a wrongful death action is not a party for purposes of establishing harm or injury.
• It is not relevant and may be prejudicial that a surviving spouse suffered as a result of the death
• Evidence that is admissible for other purposes is not rendered inadmissible because it provides evidence that a surviving spouse suffered.

Notes: It’s important for a couple of purposes to understand who the “parties” are to a case. Generally that just refers to who is suing and who is being sued, and it’s important because it establishes who is most directly affected, which is relevant for answering a couple of important questions. As simple as that sounds in theory, it gets complicated in practice. In this year’s case, for instance, Andy Allen is suing on behalf of Lee Allen, who can’t sue because s/he’s dead. What’s Andy Allen’s relationship to the case then? Is s/he a party because s/he’s the one suing? Or isn’t s/he, because s/he’s not suing in her own name, but on behalf of another’s estate? This case law answers those questions, essentially by saying “it depends.” Surviving spouses like Andy Allen are parties for evidentiary purposes: basically, anytime when you’re evaluating whether or not evidence can come in under the Midlands Rules of Evidence, Andy Allen is a party. The case law specifies that this is true in particular for the party-opponent hearsay exemption, so anything Andy Allen said that the defense wants to bring in will probably get past hearsay. Surviving spouses like Andy Allen are not parties for purposes of establishing harm. If you go back and look at the selections from the Midlands Civil Code we’re given, the third thing the plaintiff has to prove under Rule 1200 is that the plaintiff suffered injury. Injuries Andy Allen suffered don’t count towards proving that, because this case says s/he isn’t a party. Only injuries Lee Allen suffered matter.