Schmidt v. Menasha Woodenware Co.

• Decision Date: 12 April 1898
• Parties: SCHMIDT v. MENASHA WOODENWARE CO.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

99 Wis. 300

74 N.W. 797

SCHMIDT

v.MENASHA WOODENWARE CO.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

April 12, 1898.

Appeal from circuit court, Winnebago county; George W. Burnell, Judge.

Action by Anna Schmidt, administratrix of the estate of Christ Schmidt, against the Menasha Wooden-Ware Company. From a judgment in favor of defendant, C. W. Staeffler, administrator of the estates of Anna Schmidt and Christ Schmidt, appeals. Affirmed.

In July, 1894, one Christ Schmidt was killed by an explosion in defendant's factory, under circumstances alleged to be such as to render it liable therefor. Afterwards his widow was appointed administratrix of his estate, and commenced this action to recover damages, under the statute, for her husband's death. Pending the action, she married one C. W. Staeffler, by whom she had one child now living. On December 28, 1896, the widow died. Staeffler was appointed the administrator of her estate, and of her former husband's estate, and upon proper petition seeks to have this action revived in his name as administrator of the two estates, and asks leave to file a new complaint. The court denied his petition, and struck his supplemental complaint from the files. Staeffler, feeling aggrieved, appeals from the order thus entered.J. C. Kerwin, for appellant.

Felker, Stewart & Felker, for respondent.

BARDEEN, J. (after stating the facts).

Under the common law, the right to prosecute the defendant for its alleged negligence in causing the death of Schmidt did not survive. But the wisdom of the legislature has provided that the offending party shall not escape responsibility. Sections 4255, 4256, Rev. St., give a new action, in this case, to the widow, and a right to recover such damages as the jury may deem fair and just in reference to the pecuniary loss to her resulting from such death. The damages that could be recovered are limited to a mere indemnity for the resulting injury to the widow. Regan v. Railway Co., 51 Wis. 599, 8 N. W. 292;Topping v. Town of St. Lawrence, 86 Wis. 526, 57 N. W. 365. Such damages do not go to the estate of the deceased, but to the beneficiary named in the statute. Gores v. Graff, 77 Wis. 174, 46 N. W. 48. The theory of the statute as interpreted by the decisions is that certain beneficiaries named therein, who have sustained an injury by reason of the wrongful death, are entitled to be recompensed for the actual loss sustained. The fact that certain beneficiaries named therein take to the exclusion of others would seem to indicate that the legislature never intended that the provisions should inure to the benefit of persons not named therein. It is in harmony with this construction that this court...