Case Name: Shawndee and Sharette THIROUX, Minors, By and Through Their Legal Guardian, Vanessa E. Santa CRUZ v. Jason W. AUSTIN, a Minor, By and Through His Legal Guardian and Next Friend, Nettie ARCENEAUX
Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Mississippi
Decision Date: 1999-11-18
Citations: 749 So. 2d 1040
Docket Number: No. 97-CA-01222-SCT
Parties: Shawndee and Sharette THIROUX, Minors, By and Through Their Legal Guardian, Vanessa E. Santa CRUZ v. Jason W. AUSTIN, a Minor, By and Through His Legal Guardian and Next Friend, Nettie ARCENEAUX.
Judges: PRATHER, C.J., PITTMAN, P.J., BANKS, SMITH, MILLS AND COBB, JJ., CONCUR. McRAE, J., SPECIALLY CONCURS WITH SEPARATE WRITTEN OPINION JOINED BY SULLIVAN, P.J.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 749
Pages: 1040–1044

Head Matter:
Shawndee and Sharette THIROUX, Minors, By and Through Their Legal Guardian, Vanessa E. Santa CRUZ v. Jason W. AUSTIN, a Minor, By and Through His Legal Guardian and Next Friend, Nettie ARCENEAUX.
No. 97-CA-01222-SCT.
Supreme Court of Mississippi.
Nov. 18, 1999.
Robert H. Tyler, V. Denise Lee, Biloxi, Attorneys for Appellants.
H.M. Yoste, Jr., Biloxi, Russell S. Gill, Gulfport, Attorneys for Appellees.

Opinion:
WALLER, Justice, for the Court:
STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS
¶ 1. Jason W. Austin was tried, convicted, and sentenced for the murder of William Albert Thiroux, Jr., who left no surviving spouse, and was survived by two minor children, who were also his sole heirs at law. The legal guardian of the two minor children filed the instant wrongful death action almost three and a half years after the death of their father. The trial judge dismissed the action on Austin's M.R.C.P. 12(c) motion, finding that the minor savings clause did not toll the statute of limitation for a wrongful death action. We reverse and remand.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
¶ 2. This Court employs a de novo standard of review for dismissals of actions on the pleadings pursuant to M.R.C.P. 12. See Young v. State, 731 So.2d 1120 (Miss.1999).
STATEMENT OF THE LAW
¶ 3. In Arender v. Smith County Hosp., 431 So.2d 491 (Miss.1983), this Court held that the minors saving clause would not apply to a wrongful death claim. Arender erroneously relied on the 1895 case of Foster v. Yazoo & M.V.R. Co., 72 Miss. 886, 18 So. 380 (1895). Foster, in finding that the savings clause did not apply to a wrongful death action, interpreted a predecessor wrongful death statute containing its own statute of limitation, and a predecessor savings clause with slightly different wording than the one applicable in Arender. The savings clause at issue in Foster applied to "any of the personal actions before mentioned." Miss. Code of 1892 § 2746 (emphasis added). Therefore, the Court reasoned that it did not apply to a wrongful death action, as the wrongful death statute was not "before mentioned." At that time, the wrongful death cause of action was provided its own statute of limitation, which did not include a savings clause for minors. On the contrary, the current wrongful death statute, and the one in effect at the time of Aren-der, does not contain its own statute of limitation. Therefore that statute is subject to the provisions regarding limitations of actions in Title 15 of the Mississippi Code. See Miss.Code Ann. § 11-7-13 (Supp.1999). Also, the savings clause interpreted in Foster no longer contains the phrase "before mentioned" as it did at the time of Foster, which limited its application to the actions provided for in the same Chapter. There is no question now that the savings clause, set out in § 15-1-59 of the Mississippi Code, applies to a wrongful death action. But see Cole v. State, 608 So.2d 1313 (Miss.1992) (holding that the savings clause does not apply to the Mississippi Uniform Posb-Conviction Collateral Relief Act, which provides its own separate statute of limitation in Miss.Code Ann. § 99-39-5(2)) and Marcum v. Han cock County Sch. Dist., 741 So.2d 234 (Miss.1999) (holding that the minor savings clause in Miss.Code Ann. § 15-1-59 does not apply to the Mississippi Tort Claims Act, which has a separate statute of limitation contained in Miss.Code Ann. § 11 — 46— 11).
¶ 4. We note that the parties in this case have concluded that the applicable statute of limitation is that found in Miss.Code Ann. § 15-1^49 (1995), the general three-year statute of limitation applied to "all claims for which no other period of limitations is prescribed." However, a wrongful death action, since it is predicated on an underlying tort, is limited by the statute of limitation applicable to the tort resulting in the wrongful death. In this case, the underlying tort is one of assault and battery (murder), which cause is limited to a one-year period. Miss.Code Ann. § 15-1-35 (1995); see Veselits ex rel. Cruthirds v. Veselits, 653 F.Supp. 1570, 1575 (S.D.Miss.), aff'd on other grounds, 824 F.2d 391 (5th Cir.1987). However, the applicable statute of limitation is not outcome-determinative since the action is still preserved by the minor savings clause.
¶ 5. We reverse the trial court's judgment which dismissed this action, and we remand this case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
¶ 6. REVERSED AND REMANDED.
PRATHER, C.J., PITTMAN, P.J., BANKS, SMITH, MILLS AND COBB, JJ., CONCUR. McRAE, J., SPECIALLY CONCURS WITH SEPARATE WRITTEN OPINION JOINED BY SULLIVAN, P.J.