Civil Procedure
![handle is hein.journals/mcglr29 and id is 507 raw text is: California Wrongful Death Statute: Correcting an
Unintended Mistake
Kimberly Jean Wedding
Code Sections Affected
Code of Civil Procedure § 377.060(d), § 377.060(e) (new).
SB 449 (Sher); 1997 STAT. Ch. 13
(Effective May 23, 1997)
I. INTRODUCIION
On December 14, 1994, a Learjet crashed in Fresno, California, resulting in the
death of pilots Brad Sexton and Richard E. Anderson.! Sexton left behind a wife,
mother, father, two brothers, and one sister.2 The following year, Sexton's parents,
Jacque and Isabel, sued Learjet for the wrongful death of their son, arguing that
Learjet's negligence caused an on-board fire, resulting in the crash. However, the
Sextons' suit was dismissed after Learjet argued that the Sextons had no standing
to sue according to California Code of Civil Procedure section 377.60.! This section
did not allow parents to sue for the wrongful death of their married child if the
parents' cause of action arose between 1993 and 1997.
In the midst of their appeal, the Sextons contacted Senator Byron Sher
requesting urgency legislation to rectify this problem.6 Consequently, Chapter 13
was enacted to restore the ability of parents, like the Sextons, to sue for the wrong-
1. See Felicia Cousart, Pilot's Family Coping With Loss, FRESNOBEE, Dec. 28,1994, at Al (reporting the
crash of a Learjet in Fresno, California).
2. See Russell Clemings, The Learjet Tragedy: A Father's Quest, FRESNO BEE, Dec. 8, 1996, at Al
(identifying the family members that Brad Sexton left behind following his death on December 14, 1994).
3. Cyndee Fontana & Tom Kertscher, Two More Suits Filed in Learjet Crash; Pilot's Family, Apartment
Residents and Employees Seek Damages, FRESNO BEE, Dec. 13, 1995, at B3 (stating that the Sextons had filed suit
for unspecified damages in Los Angeles Superior Court on December 8, 1995).
4. See Clemings, supra note 2, at Al (describing that the Sexton's suit against Leaijet had been thrown
out of court in August because of a technical problem over their standing, oreligibility to sue); see also Letterfrom
Jacque Sexton to Senator Byron Sher (Jan. 21, 1997) (copy on file with the McGeorge Law Review) [hereinafter
Letter from Jacque Sexton] (explaining that Learjet had persuaded the court to find that the Sextons had no standing
to sue them for the wrongful death of their son).
5. See CAL. Civ. PROC. CODE § 377.60 (amended by Chapter 13) (allowing parents to sue for the wrongful
death of their child, who had left no surviving issue at the time of death, if the cause of action arose after January
1997); see also Clemings, supra note 2, at Al (reporting that the Sextons' suit was dismissed because California
law did not permit parents to sue for the wrongful death of their married child).
6. See Davis v. County of Los Angeles, 12 Cal. 2d 412, 418, 84 P.2d 1034, 1038 (1938) (defining an
urgency statute as one which is necessary for immediate preservation of the public peace, health or safety); see
also Letter from Jacque Sexton, supra note 4, at 1 (requesting Senator Sher's assistance in getting urgency
legislation passed to correct the four year time period in which parents, such as himself, had no standing to sue).
453](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/mcglr29&div=38&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Civil Procedure
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most