Whittlesey v. Miller
562 S.W.2d 904 (1978)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
In Texas, either spouse has an independent cause of action for loss of consortium when the other spouse suffers physical injury as a result of a third party's negligence.
Facts:
- In June 1974, a vehicle driven by Stewart Miller was involved in a collision with a vehicle driven by David Whittlesey.
- Stewart Miller sustained personal injuries, allegedly due to the negligence of Whittlesey.
- As a result of her husband's injuries, Ann Miller, Stewart's wife, was deprived of her husband's consortium, which includes affection, solace, comfort, companionship, and society.
- In March 1976, Stewart Miller entered into a settlement agreement with David Whittlesey, releasing Whittlesey from liability for the accident in exchange for $9,650.
- Ann Miller was not a party to her husband's settlement agreement and did not sign the release.
Procedural Posture:
- Ann Miller sued David Whittlesey in a Texas trial court for loss of consortium.
- The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Whittlesey, ruling that a Texas wife could not recover for loss of consortium due to negligent injury to her husband.
- Ann Miller appealed to the court of civil appeals (an intermediate appellate court).
- The court of civil appeals reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for trial.
- Whittlesey, the appellant, then appealed this decision to the Supreme Court of Texas.
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 a spouse have an independent cause of action for loss of consortium resulting from physical injuries negligently caused to the other spouse by a third party?
Opinions:
Majority - McGee, Justice
Yes. Either spouse has a cause of action for loss of consortium that might arise as a result of an injury caused to the other spouse by a third party tortfeasor’s negligence. The court recognized that the marital relationship is a primary familial interest and that the intangible, emotional elements of marriage—such as affection, solace, and companionship—are worthy of legal protection from negligent invasion. The court rejected the argument that such damages are too intangible or conjectural, equating them to damages for pain and suffering which are routinely awarded. This holding overturns prior precedent that denied this right to wives, bringing Texas law in line with the majority of jurisdictions and reflecting modern social realities. The court further held that this cause of action is independent of the physically injured spouse's claim; therefore, a settlement executed solely by the injured spouse does not bar the other spouse's separate claim for loss of consortium.
Analysis:
This landmark decision judicially created a cause of action for negligent loss of consortium for both spouses in Texas, bringing the state in line with the majority of American jurisdictions. By overturning precedent, the Texas Supreme Court asserted its role in evolving the common law to reflect modern societal values regarding the equal partnership of marriage. The ruling clarifies that the deprived spouse's claim is independent, meaning a tortfeasor cannot achieve full and final settlement of a personal injury claim without obtaining a release from both the physically injured person and their spouse. This has significant practical implications for personal injury litigation and settlement negotiations.
Unlock the full brief for Whittlesey v. Miller