Livingston v. Bias, 52874

Decision Date11 February 1982
Docket NumberNo. 52874,52874
Citation7 Kan.App.2d 287,640 P.2d 362
PartiesCraig LIVINGSTON, Appellant, v. Leonard BIAS, Appellee.
CourtKansas Court of Appeals

Syllabus by the Court

1. Substitution of parties and revivor of actions are different names for the same thing. The revivor of an action is in fact the substitution of new parties who have the right, under the substantive law, to go ahead with the prosecution or defense of the claim. Where an action has been commenced and a necessary party to the action dies, a procedure is required to bring into court the persons who have become, by right of succession under the substantive law, the real parties in interest. If such is not accomplished within a reasonable time, the action abates and is dismissed unless it is one of those referred to in K.S.A. 60-225(a )(2).

2. Revivor, or substitution of parties, is purely a matter of statutory law and strict compliance with statutory requirements (K.S.A. 60-225) must be shown.

3. K.S.A. 60-225(a )(1) requires a motion to bring into court the persons who have become, by right of succession under the substantive law, the real parties in interest, and if such is not accomplished within a reasonable time after the death is suggested upon the record, the action shall be dismissed as to the deceased party.

Ira Dennis Hawver of Hawver & Irigonegaray, P. A., Topeka, for appellant.

Charles L. Davis, Jr., of Davis, Unrein, Hummer & McCallister, Topeka, for appellee.

Before FOTH, C. J., and REES and SPENCER, JJ.

SPENCER, Judge:

The sole issue presented on this appeal is whether the action was properly dismissed pursuant to K.S.A. 60-225(a )(1).

An automobile collision involving plaintiff and the named defendant, which occurred December 28, 1976, resulted in this case being filed May 25, 1978. Defendant a resident of Missouri, died March 2, 1980, after the case was at issue. The pretrial order of June 2, 1980, reflects a suggestion of defendant's death.

The case was scheduled for trial before a jury on September 22, 1980. On that date, plaintiff moved the court for an order "(1) that Defendant's insurer is actually the only real party Defendant in interest, and, (2) that Mrs. Leonard B. Bias is not the real party in interest and thus has no right to sit at defense counsel's table during trial of this matter." The court ruled that defendant's widow should not sit at defense counsel's table, but made no ruling with respect to the remainder of the motion. In this posture, the case went to trial. There was a hung jury and a mistrial declared.

Nothing thereafter appears to have taken place until December 8, 1980, when defense counsel filed a motion to dismiss for plaintiff's failure to substitute a representative party for the deceased defendant pursuant to K.S.A. 60-225(a )(1), and the expiration of time during which plaintiff was required to exhibit his claim against defendant's estate under the Kansas nonclaim statute, K.S.A. 59-2239.

On December 16, 1980, the court considered defendant's motion to dismiss and plaintiff's earlier motion to find defendant's insurer the real party in interest, treating the latter as a motion to substitute, and concluded that as Kansas law prohibits a direct action against an automobile insurance company for damages alleged to have been caused by its insured, defendant's insurer was not a proper party for substitution; and, in the absence of the substitution of a proper party, the suit could not be maintained. The court did not rely on 59-2239, implicitly finding the provisions of the Kansas probate code to be inapplicable where the court determined defendant, a Missouri resident, did not die possessed of any tangible or intangible property having situs in this state. Kent v. Chase, Special Administrator, 1 Kan.App.2d 251, 563 P.2d 1103 (1977).

K.S.A. 60-225(a )(1) provides:

"If a party dies and the claim is not thereby extinguished, the court shall on motion order substitution of the proper parties. The motion for substitution may be made by any party or by the successors or representatives of the deceased party or by any party and, together with the notice of the hearing, shall be served on the parties as provided in K.S.A. 60-205, and upon persons not parties in the manner provided for the service of a summons. Unless the motion for substitution is made within a reasonable time after the death is suggested upon the record by service of a statement of the fact of the death as provided herein for the service of the motion, the action shall be dismissed as to the deceased party."

Plaintiff concedes his motion to find defendant's insurer the real party in interest was properly denied in that, as a general rule, an automobile insurance company may not be made an original party to a lawsuit against its insured. White v. Goodville Mut. Cas. Co., 226 Kan. 191, 596 P.2d 1229 (1979). Nonetheless, plaintiff relies on that portion of K.S.A. 60-225(a )(1) which states that "(u)nless the motion for substitution is made within a reasonable time after the death is suggested upon the record ... the action shall be dismissed as to the deceased party," for the proposition that the provisions of the statute are satisfied when a motion to substitute...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Graham v. Jones
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • July 12, 2013
    ...purely temporal and that any substitution delay over 6 months is always unreasonable. In both Riggs, and Livingston v. Bias, 7 Kan.App.2d 287, 290, 640 P.2d 362 (1982)( Livingston I ),the Court of Appeals found that a “reasonable time” implies a requirement of due diligence. Riggs found tha......
  • Moore v. Luther
    • United States
    • Kansas Court of Appeals
    • November 30, 2001
    ...Estate of Bias, 9 Kan. App.2d 146, 673 P.2d 1197 (1984); Buettner v. Unruh, 7 Kan. App.2d 359, 642 P.2d 124 (1982); Livingston v. Bias, 7 Kan. App.2d 287, 640 P.2d 362 (1982); Long v. Riggs, 5 Kan. App.2d 416, 617 P.2d 1270 (1980); Gatewood v. Bosch, 2 Kan. App.2d 474, 581 P.2d 1198 (1978).......
  • Estate of Rains, Matter of
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • July 12, 1991
    ...parties who have the right, under the substantive law, to go ahead with the prosecution or defense of the claim.' Livingston v. Bias, 7 Kan.App.2d 287, 289, 640 P.2d 362 (1982)." 702 F.Supp. at In view of the fact the Reno County District Court referred to the procedure set forth in K.S.A.1......
  • Estate of Rains v. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp., Civ. A. No. 87-1533-T.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Kansas
    • May 3, 1988
    ...who have the right, under the substantive law, to go ahead with the prosecution or defense of the claim." Livingston v. Bias, 7 Kan. App.2d 287, 289, 640 P.2d 362 (1982). Substitution of parties is governed by the three prerequisites of K.S.A. 60-225(a)(1). The statute If a party dies and t......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT