Gandy v. United States
2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35818, 2006 WL 1537371, 437 F.Supp.2d 1085 (2006)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under Arizona’s survival statute, A.R.S. § 14-3110, damages for a decedent's lost earnings are limited to the period between the date of injury and the date of death to prevent duplicative recovery with a wrongful death claim.
Facts:
- On September 9, 1999, Sally Robbins underwent an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatogram (ERCP) performed by the Veterans Administration Medical Center.
- Robbins alleged the procedure was performed negligently, causing a permanent injury to her pancreas.
- Due to her pancreatic problems, Robbins took various prescription medications.
- On May 22, 2005, Robbins died as a result of a toxic level of combined prescription medications.
- Robbins was survived by her children and parents.
- Troy Gandy was appointed as the personal representative of Sally Robbins' estate.
Procedural Posture:
- On June 27, 2003, Sally Robbins filed a complaint against the United States of America in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, alleging medical negligence under the Federal Torts Claims Act.
- Following Robbins's death, Troy Gandy was appointed personal representative of her estate.
- The district court granted Plaintiff's Motion to Amend the Complaint to add a survival claim on behalf of the estate and a wrongful death claim on behalf of the statutory beneficiaries.
- The Amended Complaint sought $522,117.00 in lost earnings damages under the survival statute.
- The Defendant, United States of America, filed a Motion in Limine in the district court to exclude all evidence of Robbins's lost future earnings in the survival claim, limiting such evidence to the period between her injury and death.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does Arizona's survival statute, A.R.S. § 14-3110, permit a decedent's estate to recover damages for lost future earnings that would have accrued after the decedent's death?
Opinions:
Majority - Teilborg, District Judge.
No. Arizona's survival statute does not permit the decedent's estate to recover for lost earnings that would have been earned after death. A survival action is distinct from a wrongful death action, and allowing recovery for post-mortem earnings in a survival action would create an impermissible double recovery. The court reasoned that under Arizona law, which applies per the Federal Torts Claims Act, survival claims and wrongful death claims are separate and not mutually exclusive. The court noted that the survival statute, A.R.S. § 14-3110, is silent on the recovery of future earnings. In the absence of direct Arizona precedent, the court looked to other jurisdictions and the Restatement (Second) of Torts, which both support limiting survival damages to the period before death. This limitation is necessary because wrongful death damages begin where survival damages end, at the moment of death, thus preventing an overlap where beneficiaries could recover for lost financial support in a wrongful death claim while the estate recovers for the same lost future earnings in a survival claim.
Analysis:
This decision clarifies the scope of economic damages available under Arizona's survival statute, aligning it with the majority rule in the United States and the Restatement (Second) of Torts. By establishing a clear temporal line at the moment of death, the court reinforces the distinct purposes of survival and wrongful death actions. This ruling prevents the potential for duplicative damage awards, ensuring that survival actions compensate the estate for the decedent's pre-death losses while wrongful death actions compensate beneficiaries for their post-death losses. This creates a predictable framework for calculating damages in future cases involving both types of claims.
