 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Estate of Kronemeyer11/13/1997
unambiguous language of the statute, which bars a second civil action for wrongful death based upon the death of the same decedent.
The primary task in construing a statute is to effectuate the intent of the General Assembly. Regional Transportation District v. Lopez, 916 P.2d 1187 (Colo. 1996). When interpreting a statute, we look first to the language and give effect to the plain and ordinary meaning of the words used. Farmers Group, Inc. v. Williams, 805 P.2d 419 (Colo. 1991). If the plain and ordinary wording of the statute reasonably indicates the intent of the General Assembly and does not lead to an absurd result, we look no further and do not apply any other rules of construction, such as examining the legislative history. Rodgriguez v. Schutt, 914 P.2d 921 (Colo. 1996).
We conclude that the plain language of Section13-21-203(1) clearly and unambiguously reflects the intent of the General Assembly to permit only one wrongful death action for the death of one decedent. Pursuing in a sequential manner several wrongful death actions, against different defendants, and asserting different causes of death, is prohibited. Therefore, the trial court correctly concluded that the second wrongful death action in the instant case could not be maintained.
II.
The plaintiffs contend alternatively that, even if the trial court was correct in dismissing the wrongful death claims, it erred in dismissing the action in its entirety, thereby dismissing the claims for medical and funeral expenses under the Survival Statute with the wrongful death claims. We agree.
The basis for defendant's motion for summary judgment was limited to the dismissal of the wrongful death action based on Section13-21-203(1), C.R.S. 1997. The damages recoverable under the Wrongful Death Statute are not exclusive, and therefore, some damages may be recoverable under another theory or statute, such as the Survival Statute. Espinoza v. Gurule, 144 Colo. 381, 356 P.2d 891 (1960).
In its grant of summary judgment, the trial court did not address the Survival Statute claims of the personal representative for the estate, even though the language in Section13-21- 203(1) of the Wrongful Death Statute applies only to wrongful death actions. We therefore conclude that the claims of the estate under the Survival Statute must be reinstated.
The judgment is affirmed as to the dismissal of the wrongful death claims; it is reversed as to the claims of the estate under the Survival Statute, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.
CHIEF JUDGE STERNBERG and JUDGE ROY concur
|