Case ID: ohio-cc-dec_25/html/0283-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "METCALFE, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ACTIONS — DAMAGES—NEGLIGENCE.
    [Belmont (7th) Court of Appeals,
    December 11, 1914.]
    Metcalfe, Pollock and Spence, JJ.
    Andrew H. Sloan, Admr. v. Lorain Coal & Dock Co.
    Bight to Recover for Negligence Survives Death but Recovery is Limited to Loss of Wages, Pain and Suffering.
    A cause of action in favor of a person injured by another’s negligence survives the death of the injured person by virtue of Sec. 11235 G. C. and may be maintained by the administrator for the benefit of the estate. The recovery in such case is limited to such loss of wages, pain and suffering, and the like, as the decedent himself could have recovered at the time of his death.
    [Syllabus by the court.]
    Error.
    
      J. M. Bees, for plaintiff in error.
    P. P. Lewis, for defendant in error.
   METCALFE, J.

This action is brought by the administrator of Everett Sloan deceased to recover damages for injuries to said Everett Sloan by reason of the alleged negligence of the defendant. The action is brought on behalf of the estate, and it is averred in the petition that said Everett Sloan did not leave surviving him any of the persons on whose behalf a recovery could be had under the wrongful death statute. A demurrer was sustained to the petition in the court of common pleas. The question here is, does such a cause of action survive the death of the injured person purely for the benefit of the estate by virtue of Sec. 11235 G. C.

In the case of Ohio & Penn. Coal Co. v. Smith, 53 Ohio St. 313 [41 N. E. Rep. 254], and Mahoning Val. Ry. v. Van Alstine, 77 Ohio St. 395 [83 N. E. Rep. 601; 14 L. R. A. (N. S.) 893], it is held that pending actions for such injuries survive the death of the plaintiff by virtue of Sec. 11397 G. C., but it is insisted that where the ‘action had not been begun the cause of action would not survive.

Section 11235 G. C. provides:

“In addition to the causes which survive at common law, causes of action for mesne profits, or injuries to the person or property, or for deceit or fraud, also shall survive; and the action may be brought notwithstanding the death of the person entitled or liable thereto.”

This section seems to us susceptible of but one construction. For injuries to the person the cause of action shall survive notwithstanding the death of the person entitled or liable thereto. The statute speaks of “causes of action” which survive, not of pending actions, and we think the reasoning in Mahoning Val. Ry. v. Van Alstine, supra, supports the contention in this case.

The judgment of the court of common pleas in sustaining the demurrer to the petition is reversed.

Pollock and Spence, JJ., concur.