Peck v. Taylor, 75--796

Decision Date01 July 1976
Docket NumberNo. 75--796,75--796
PartiesWilliam H. PECK and Carol Ann Isaac, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Evonne Mary TAYLOR and Cherry Creek School District #5, Defendants-Appellees. . II
CourtColorado Court of Appeals

Nathan Davidovich, P.C., Denver, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Montgomery Little Young Campbell & McGrew, P.C., Robert R. Montgomery, Denver, for defendants-appellees.

VanCISE, Judge.

Lillian Marjorie Peck died in February 1973, allegedly as a direct result of injuries sustained in a collision between the car in which she was a passenger and a school bus driven by defendant, Evonne Mary Taylor. In July 1974, her surviving spouse, William H. Peck, and her daughter, Carol Ann Isaac, instituted this action against Taylor and her employer, Cherry Creek School District No. 5. The first claim is for wrongful death, and both plaintiffs seek damages for their losses resulting therefrom. The second claim is by the daughter for her own personal injuries incurred in the same accident.

On defendants' motion, the court dismissed the claim of the surviving spouse on the ground that, inasmuch as he did not institute an action during the first year after the accident and the daughter has sued, he has no standing to be a party at this time. Leave was granted to the spouse to intervene in the action later in the event the daughter should elect to abandon the litigation. The spouse appeals this judgment of dismissal. We reverse.

The issue in this case is whether a wrongful death action instituted the second year after the death by both the surviving spouse and the daughter as co-plaintiffs can be maintained by both plaintiffs.

Section 13--21--201(1), C.R.S.1973, specifies that an action for wrongful death may be brought:

'(a) By the husband or wife of deceased; or

(b) If there is no husband or wife, or he or she fails to sue within one year after such death, then by the heir or heirs of the deceased . . ..'

This statute has been interpreted by our Supreme Court in numerous decisions. From these, it is clear that the surviving spouse has the exclusive right to bring the action within the first year from the date of death, Clint v. Stolworthy, 144 Colo. 597, 357 P.2d 649, and that the right to sue of the heirs (interpreted as lineal descendants for the purposes of this portion of the statute, McGill v. General Motors Corp., 174 Colo. 388, 484 P.2d 790) depends on either there being no surviving spouse or on the spouse's not having sued during the first year. Hayes v. Williams, 17 Colo. 465, 30 P. 352. And, if the spouse does not sue within the first year, the heir or heirs may bring an action during the second year, but, if...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Reighley v. International Playtex, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Colorado
    • March 18, 1985
    ...and vests the primary, exclusive right in the surviving spouse unless suit is not brought within the year after death. Peck v. Taylor, 38 Colo.App. 90, 554 P.2d 698 (1976); Clint v. Stolworthy, 144 Colo. 597, 357 P.2d 649 Defendant contends that the children's claim must be dismissed for la......
  • Murphy v. Colorado Aviation, Inc.
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • August 3, 1978
    ...one year, she can maintain an action at any time before the expiration of two years jointly with the decedent's children. Peck v. Taylor, Colo.App., 554 P.2d 698 (1976). We consider this rule applicable to C.R.S.1963, 41-1-1, that being the identical predecessor to § 13-21-201(1), C.R.S.197......
  • Beikmann v. International Playtex, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Colorado
    • April 22, 1987
    ...1078 (D.Colo.1985). Alternatively, the surviving spouse may sue during the second year with or without the minor. Peck v. Taylor, 38 Colo.App. 90, 554 P.2d 698 (1976). This is not a case where a minor, against the surviving spouse's wishes, has attempted to breach the exclusivity privilege ......
  • NIVEN, BY AND THROUGH v. Falkenburg
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Colorado
    • January 7, 1983
    ...Railroad Co., 162 F.Supp. 558 (D.Colo.1958) (Arraj, J.);3 Clint v. Stolworthy, supra, Hindry v. Holt, supra. Even Peck v. Taylor, 38 Colo.App. 90, 554 P.2d 698 (1976) argued by plaintiffs to support their position holds that the exclusive right to bring suit within the first year lies with ......
  • 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