Summary
The Utah Supreme Court held that Utah's wrongful-death and survival-action statutes permit a person acting as an heir or personal representative to sue herself in her individual capacity as the alleged tortfeasor. The court rejected arguments that the statutory language or absurdity doctrine barred the action. It affirmed the court of appeals and remanded for further litigation concerning whether the tortfeasor could ultimately recover insurance proceeds paid as damages.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Utah's wrongful-death statute, Utah Code section 78B-3-106, permits a person acting as an heir to sue herself in her individual capacity as the person who caused the decedent's death.
- Whether Utah's survival-action statute, Utah Code section 78B-3-107, permits a person acting as a personal representative to sue herself in her individual capacity as the wrongdoer.
- Whether the court should invoke Utah's absurdity doctrine to rewrite the statutes and prohibit such suits.
- Whether related statutes and public-policy considerations required dismissal at the pleading stage or instead addressed only the separate question of ultimate recovery.
Holdings
- Utah Code sections 78B-3-106 and 78B-3-107 permit a person acting as an heir or personal representative to sue herself in her individual capacity for negligently causing the decedent's injury or death.
- The court will not invoke the absurdity doctrine because allowing a person to sue herself in different legal capacities is not so overwhelmingly absurd that no rational legislator could have intended the result.
- The related statutes and public-policy arguments did not establish that the plaintiff lacked a cause of action; they concern the separate issue of whether the plaintiff may ultimately recover damages or insurance proceeds.
Key quotations
“For the foregoing reasons we hold that the court of appeals did not err when it concluded that the wrongful death and survival action statutes permit a person acting in the legal capacity of an heir or personal representative to sue him or herself in an individual capacity for negligently causing a decedent's death or injury.” (¶ 42)
“This court has developed a narrow, exacting standard for determining whether to apply the absurdity doctrine and read a statute contrary to its plain meaning.” (¶ 28)
“Neither the wrongful death nor the survival action statutes contain gaps that the legislature did not intend to create.” (¶ 35)
Factual background
Barbara Bagley, the common-law wife of Bradley Vom Baur, lost control of a vehicle on December 27, 2011, causing Vom Baur severe injuries. Vom Baur died from those injuries ten days later. Bagley maintained motor-vehicle insurance and, acting as Vom Baur's sole heir and personal representative, sued herself individually for wrongful death and survival damages, apparently to obtain insurance proceeds for herself as heir and to satisfy estate creditors.
Procedural history
Barbara Bagley, acting as the decedent's sole heir and personal representative, sued herself individually for negligently causing the decedent's injuries and death. The district court dismissed the complaint, concluding that the wrongful-death and survival statutes did not permit the heir or personal representative to be the same person as the defendant tortfeasor. The Utah Court of Appeals reversed, and the Utah Supreme Court affirmed the court of appeals on certiorari, remanding for further litigation concerning whether damages could ultimately be recovered.
Remand instructions
Remand for further litigation in the district court concerning whether the Liability Reform Act or other law bars recovery of damages or insurance proceeds in the circumstances of the case.