Court Opinion

ID: 9793009
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 02:40:46.592025+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:02:34.818891
License: Public Domain

JACKSON, Justice
(concurring specially)-
Our holdings in Fiedler v. Fiedler, 42 Okl. 124, 140 P. 1022, and Courtney v. Courtney, 184 Okl. 395, 87 P.2d 660, are distinguishable from the facts in the present case.
In Fiedler the former wife was permitted to maintain an action against her former husband for malicious injuries intentionally inflicted upon her by him during cov-erture.
In Courtney the wife was permitted to maintain an action against her husband for injuries negligently inflicted upon her by her husband.
In both the cited cases the injuries were directly inflicted upon the wife by the wrongdoer. In the present case the injuries were not directly inflicted upon her, and her cause of action, if any, is for consequential damages resulting from personal injuries sustained by her husband.
The Legislature has given a surviving wife a cause of action for consequential damages for the death of her husband, caused by the wrongful act of another. 12 O.S.1961, Sec. 1053. We are asked to legislatively extend that statute so that a wife may recover consequential damages sustained by her because of personal injuries inflicted upon her husband by the negligence of another. If we expand that statute to give her relief in this case then we have the power to expand it so that all other persons who have suffered a pecuniary loss will have a cause of action. It could be argued that this result is consistent with Art. 2, Sec. 6, Okla.Constitution, which provides that there shall be a remedy afforded “for every wrong and for every injury.”
Before we move into the legislative field to provide a remedy for every wrong and every injury we should be aware that Art. 5, Sec. 1, Oklahoma Constitution vests the Legislative authority of this State in the Legislature. We should also be aware that Art. 4, Sec. 1, Oklahoma Constitution, tells, this court not to exercise powers properly belonging to another department of government.
When our jurisdiction is properly invoked it is the prerogative of this court to determine when one department of government is improperly exercising powers belonging to another. Since this responsibility is ours we should be most careful not to infringe upon the powers constitutionally given to another department of government.