Opinion ID: 1372176
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Oregon Wrongful Death Act.

Text: The original Oregon Wrongful Death Act was enacted in 1862. See Deady, General Laws of Oregon 1845-1864, p. 241, § 367. The recovery under that first statute was for the benefit of the decedent's estate and the measure of damages, as held by this court in Carlson v. Oregon Short-Line Ry. Co., 21 Or. 450, 457-58, 28 P. 497 (1892), was:    the pecuniary loss suffered by the estate, without any solatium for the grief and anguish of surviving relatives or pain and suffering of the deceased; and that loss is what the deceased would have probably earned by his intellectual or bodily labor in his business or profession during the residue of his life, and which, as representing his net savings, would have gone for the benefit of his estate   . In Carlson, however, this court (at 458-459, 28 P. at 499) expressly distinguished between the Oregon statute and statutes as elsewhere adopted modeled upon the original Lord Campbell's Act, under which the right of action is not given to the personal representative for the benefit of the estate, but for the benefit of certain persons named therein, and the personal representative is a mere nominal party, who sues for their benefit, saying:    Not so under our statute, where the object is to recover the loss sustained by the estate, and not to recover the pecuniary loss sustained by any particular individual or individuals. By force of [Hill's Code] section 371 [Deady Code § 367], the personal representative, in the prosecution of the action and the distribution of the proceeds, represents collectively all who are interested in the continuance of the life, whether as creditors, heirs, or distributees.    and that:    The difference in the two classes of cases is between the damage done to the estate and the damage done to the designated persons. That to the estate is measured, as nearly as can be, by the value of the life lost, and that to the beneficiaries by the value of the life lost to them.    We might well agree with defendant that under the original Oregon Wrongful Death Act there was but one claim to be pursued by one claimant, so as to limit recovery under the Oregon Tort Claims Act to $100,000 by reason of the provisions of ORS 30.270(1)(b). We do not agree, however, with defendants' contention that the basic character of the action remained unchanged despite subsequent amendments to the Oregon Wrongful Death Act, or with defendants' contention that the effect of those amendments was only to expand the measure and allocation of recoverable wrongful death damages. On the contrary, we believe that the effect of amendments to the Oregon Wrongful Death Act, particularly those adopted in 1973, has been to so change its basic provisions as to make the Oregon Act more similar to wrongful death acts of the type described in Carlson under which the right of action in a case such as this is not primarily for the benefit of the estate, but for the benefit of the spouse and children of the decedent as the real parties in interest, with the personal representative as a mere nominal party, who sues for their benefit for the recovery of the value of the life lost to them. Under the present Oregon Wrongful Death Act, after amendments in 1939 and 1967, [3] and more particularly in 1973, [4] recovery is now expressly provided for the benefit of the spouse, children and parents of the decedent, not only for their pecuniary loss, but also for their loss of decedent's society, companionship and services, as well as for recovery to the estate of medical and funeral expenses, among other things. [5] Thus, as a result of these amendments, the present statute provides, in effect, for an action to be brought in the name of the personal representative of the estate to enforce the individual claims of the spouse and of each child for the pecuniary loss to each of them as a result of the death of the decedent and for the loss to each of them of the decedent's society, companionship and services. This is consistent with the view as stated in 2 Speiser, Recovery for Wrongful Death 2d, 238-40, § 11:34 (1975) that: A personal representative proceeding under wrongful death statutes requiring him to bring the action for the benefit of certain designated beneficiaries is a mere nominal party having no interest in the case for himself or the estate he represents. He does not act in his general capacity as executor or administrator or as representative of the decedent's estate. Instead, he sues as trustee on behalf of the particular persons designated in the act, even though the action is brought in his name as executor or administrator. In other words, the persons designated in the statute are the real parties in interest. It follows, in our opinion, that we must reject defendants' contention that under the provisions of the Oregon Wrongful Death Act, there is in a case such as this, in which decedent left a widow and five children, but one claim to be pursued by one claimant. [6]