Opinion ID: 2305543
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Jessica's NIED Claim

Text: [¶ 15] Jessica contends that she is entitled to damages for the emotional distress she suffered from witnessing Karen's death because she is not an heir to Karen's estate and does not share in the wrongful death claim. 18-A M.R.S.A. § 2-103(2) (1998). She contends that her injury resulted not only from the death, but from witnessing the fatal injury. [¶ 16] The defendants contend that Jessica cannot recover pursuant to the wrongful death statute and that she cannot pursue a separate NIED claim. According to the defendants, it would be inconsistent with the intent of the wrongful death statute to allow Jessica, but not her parents, to recover for bystander emotional distress. [¶ 17] [F]or a bystander to recover for emotional distress proximately caused by a defendant's negligence toward another person, the bystander must demonstrate that she was present at the scene of the accident; that she suffered serious mental distress as a result of contemporaneously perceiving the accident; and that she was closely related to the victim. Champagne v. Mid-Maine Med. Ctr., 1998 ME 87, ¶ 13, 711 A.2d 842, 846. [¶ 18] Maine's wrongful death statute, as it existed at the time of Karen's death, provided, in pertinent part: [T]he amount recovered in every such action ... shall be for the exclusive benefit of ... the deceased's heirs ... if there is neither surviving spouse nor minor children. 18-A M.R.S.A. § 2-804(b) (1981), as amended by P.L.1989 ch. 340. Maine's wrongful death statute includes as heirs those persons related by blood, who take the personal estate of the deceased intestate; thus, in the case of a child, the heirs are the child's parents if they are living. Carrier v. Bornstein, 136 Me. 1, 2, 1 A.2d 219, 220 (1938) (citing R.S. ch. 101, §§ 9-10 (1930), as amended by P.L.1933, ch. 113) (predecessor to 18-A M.R.S.A. § 2-804(b)). [¶ 19] Where the wrongful death statute applies ... emotional distress claims may not be brought independently of the statute. In other words, where the wrongful death statute applies, plaintiffs may not circumvent the statute's damage cap by bringing a separate emotional distress claim. JACK H. SIMMONS et al., MAINE TORT LAW § 19.06 (2001 ed.). The beneficiaries of the wrongful death statute are limited to the remedies provided therein. Feighery v. York Hosp., 38 F.Supp.2d 142, 157 (D.Me.1999); Krempels v. Mazyck, 868 F. Supp. 355, 357-58 (D.Me.1994). [¶ 20] Because Barbara and Robert survived, they as Karen's parents are Karen's heirs and the wrongful death statute does not apply to Jessica. As a result, she is not a beneficiary who may only seek damages pursuant to the statute. Were we to conclude otherwise, Jessica would be left without any remedy, unlike her parents, who have a remedy pursuant to the wrongful death statute. The court should have permitted Jessica to recover on her NIED claim because the court's findings demonstrate that she met each element of the claim. [2]