Wrongful Death Actions: Familial Aspects that Can Increase Case Value
The goal of a trial attorney is to effectively highlight the family's pecuniary losses to the jury, in an effort to substantiate and increase the value of the claim.
October 18, 2018 at 12:00 PM
6 minute read
The death of a loved one is heartbreaking. The world stops, and the thought of moving on without a child, parent or spouse can seem impossible. They can never be replaced, yet our Wrongful Death Act severely limits family members' recovery to pecuniary losses. Plaintiffs attorneys often rely on a statistical analysis completed by an economist regarding the hours of lost services and their replacement value. The goal of a trial attorney is to effectively highlight these pecuniary losses to the jury in an effort to substantiate and increase the value of the claim.
Wrongful death actions may be brought when a person's death has been caused by the wrongful act of another, and, if death had not ensued, the injured person would have been entitled to maintain an action for damages resulting from the injury. N.J.S.A. §2A:31-1. With regard to the pecuniary injuries resulting from such a death, the jury may award damages as they shall deem fair and just. This is in addition to any hospital, medical and funeral expenses incurred. N.J.S.A. §2A:31-5.
It is important to note that there must be actual dependency. Mere relation to the deceased is not enough. Additionally, a wrongful death action does not currently permit dependents to recover for any emotional pain and suffering. However, there is a bill (S-1766) currently pending in the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee that may permit these types of damages in the future. For now, we are still constrained by our restrictive statute. As a result, we must utilize strategies that effectively highlight our wrongful death damages to the jury in a way that increases their value.
|Cultural Trends
Some ethnicities follow certain traditional family customs that can increase the value of wrongful death damages. For example, Indian, Asian and Native American cultures do not believe in placing their elderly in retirement homes because it is inherently viewed as disrespectful. Instead, they often have their parents live with them for the remainder of their lives. As the life expectancy rate continues to increase, the value of this extensive parental care and the expense and time the adult children concede to their parents would pose far more substantial damages as compared to standard long-term external care. This will dramatically increase the hours above the statistical averages provided by your economist. When applicable, it is important to highlight these cultural trends when presenting your case to the jury.
|Acorn Philosophy
The Supreme Court of New Jersey in Green v. Bittner, 85 N.J. 1, 11–12 (1980), held that loss of companionship, care and advice which a parent suffers when a child is killed will sometimes be as great as the loss of counsel, care and guidance which a child suffers when a parent is the victim. When a parent sets forth a wrongful death claim for the loss of a young child, it is important to establish the relationship the child had with his or her parents, grandparents, siblings and mentors. The same factual approach used in adult death cases is taken when it is a child who has been killed. Id. at 11.
The acorn philosophy concerns the family's history and trends involving education, employment, earnings and community activities. Did one or both of the parents go to college or graduate school? What kind of jobs have the parents had growing up or currently have? How much do the parents earn, and were they saving for the child's college fund? Was the child expected to get a job and contribute to the family income? These questions can help paint a picture for the direction the child would have likely taken in his or her life, and how much financial assistance they would have provided for their family. If the child was involved in community activities, like the local church or helping out at their grandparents' bingo night, this shows a commitment to helping the elderly and, more importantly, people in general. This will help form the basis for pecuniary losses.
|Family Harmony
The Appellate Division in Jablonowska v. Suther, 390 N.J. Super. 395 (App. Div. 2007), held that loss of companionship is limited to the value of the services that the companionship would have provided, based upon what the marketplace would pay a business adviser, therapist or trained counselor for performing such services. Although determining these values will be done by your economic expert, highlighting the family harmony will only increase and substantiate the values.
For example, the parent-to-grandparent relationship can be an indicator of how deceased children would have behaved in terms of caring for their own parents. If the grandparents live with the parents, or nearby, and the parents frequently take care of shopping responsibilities, chores and other financial support, this is an indicator that the parents would have expected their own child to do the same in the future. Advice and counsel is a general area which creates another point of increase in the value of a suit for the loss of a family member. If it is common for the parent to speak with the grandparent for day-to-day advice on life, business decisions, or providing support with mental illness such as depression, it would be likely that the deceased child would have done the same for the parent, and vice versa.
Overcoming the hardship of losing a family member poses one of the most difficult situations one must endure. In the event their death was caused by a wrongful act of another, it is important to identify family and cultural trends that can increase the overall value of a claim. Plaintiff's attorneys must spend time learning about the deceased's entire family, their relationships, family values, culture and traditions. In any wrongful death case, you should go to the survivors' homes and meet with family members. Any family personalization and familiarization that you can relate to the jury will only increase the value of your damages.
Andrew J. Rossetti is a partner in the Cherry Hill office of Rossetti & DeVoto. He is a former assistant prosecutor of Camden County and is certified as a civil trial attorney by both the New Jersey Supreme Court and the National Board of Trial Advocacy. Dean E. Avgerinos is a law clerk at Rossetti & DeVoto.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllNJDOL's Aggressive Use of Stop Work Orders Is Dramatically Altering the Compliance Landscape for Employers
8 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Friday Newspaper
- 2Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 3Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 4NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 5A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250