Title: Thayer v. Herdt

State: vermont

Issuer: Vermont Supreme Court

Document:

NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to motions for reargument under V.R.A.P. 40
as well as formal revision before publication in the Vermont Reports.
Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions, Vermont Supreme
Court, 111 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05602 of any errors in order
that corrections may be made before this opinion goes to press.


                                No. 89-243


Rose Alyce Thayer, Individually and          Supreme Court
as Administratrix of the Estate of
Katherine Richards                           On Appeal from
                                             Windsor Superior Court
              v.

Peter Herdt, Individually and as Chief       May Term, 1990
of Police of the Springfield Police
Department and the Town of Springfield,
Vermont


Alden T. Bryan, J.

Robert Reis and Phyllis R. McCoy of Hull, Webber, Reis & Canney, Rutland,
  for plaintiff-appellant

Allan R. Keyes of Ryan Smith & Carbine, Ltd., Rutland, for defendants-
  appellees


PRESENT:  Allen, C.J., Peck, Gibson, Dooley and Morse, JJ.


     ALLEN, C.J.   Plaintiff instituted this action as administratrix of
her daughter's estate seeking damages for wrongful death of her daughter and
individually for emotional distress and economic loss.  The trial court
granted defendant's motion for summary judgment on the wrongful death claim
and dismissed plaintiff's emotional distress and economic loss claim on the
pleadings.  We affirm in part and reverse in part.
                                    I.
     Defendant (FN1) moved for summary judgment on the wrongful death claim on
the ground that the statute of limitations had run.  Plaintiff concedes that
she originally instituted the action more than two years after the death of
her daughter; thus, the first issue before the Court is whether the tolling
provision in the wrongful death statute applies on the facts alleged. (FN2)
Defendant Herdt moved from Vermont to Ohio shortly after the acts
complained of and has resided there since with no known property within the
state of Vermont.
     Plaintiff argues that the statute is clear and unambiguous and that its
plain meaning controls.  On two earlier occasions, however, this Court has
considered the tolling provisions of 14 V.S.A. { 1492 and concluded that
they apply only to defendants who are not amenable to service of process
under the authority of this state within the two-year period.  Law's
Administrator v. Culver, 121 Vt. 285, 289,