Walden v. Coleman, 39201
| Decision Date | 09 January 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 39201,No. 2,39201,2 |
| Citation | 124 S.E.2d 313,105 Ga.App. 242 |
| Parties | Mrs. O. M. WALDEN v. W. C. COLEMAN |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Syllabus by the Court
The plaintiff's petition, seeking damages for the loss of consortium of her husband who died approximately 2 1/4 hours after receiving the tortious injury, stated a cause of action as against general demurrer for her loss of consortium for such period of time. Mr. O. M. Walden brought her action in the Superior Court of DeKalb County against W. C. Coleman to recover damages for the loss of consortium of her husband, who was injured in an automobile collision while riding as a guest passenger in an alleged family-purpose car, being operated by the defendant's wife. The petition disclosed that the plaintiff's husband died approximately 2 hours and 15 minutes after receiving the injuries in the collision. The trial judge sustained the defendant's general demurrer to the petition and the exception is to that judgment.
N. Forrest Montet, Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.
Smith, Field, Ringel, Martin & Carr, Palmer H. Ansley, Atlanta, for defendant in error.
The sole question for determination by this court at this time is whether or not the instant petition as against general demurrer stated a cause of action in favor of the plaintiff for the loss of consortium of her husband, where it affirmatively appeared from said petition that the husband died approximately 2 hours and 15 minutes after the tortious injury.
It is now recognized in this State that a wife has an independent cause of action for the loss of consortium of her husband due to a tortious injury inflicted upon him, although she may not in such action recover any item of damages which would be a proper item of damages in an action directly by the husband. Brown v. Georgia-Tennessee Coaches, Inc., 88 Ga.App. 519, 77 S.E.2d 24; Gordy v. Powell, 95 Ga.App. 822, 99 S.E.2d 313; Bailey v. Wilson, 100 Ga.App. 405(4), 111 S.E.2d 106; Lunsford v. Louisville & N. R. Co., 101 Ga.App. 374, 114 S.E.2d 310 (Reversed on other grounds, 216 Ga. 289, 116 S.E.2d 232).
However, whether the action be one by the husband to recover damages for the loss of consortium of his wife or, as in the instant case, by the wife for the loss of consortium of the husband, the right of consortium exists only during the joint lives of the husband and wife (Metropolitan St. R. Co. v. Johnson, 91 Ga. 466, 471, 18 S.E. 816; American Fidelity & Casualty Co., v. Farmer, 77 Ga.App. 192, 48...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Anderson v. Dunbar Armored, Inc.
...injury inflicted upon him." Pattee v. Georgia Ports Authority, 477 F.Supp.2d 1272, 1276 (S.D.Ga.2007) (citing Walden v. Coleman, 105 Ga.App. 242, 243, 124 S.E.2d 313 (1962)). Loss of consortium is therefore deemed a "derivative" claim, arising out of a tort committed against the plaintiffs ......
-
Ledger v. Tippitt, B-005211
...874.) Where the injured party lives a few hours after the injury, the spouse may recover for loss of consortium. (Walden v. Coleman (1962) 105 Ga.App. 242, 124 S.E.2d 313, 314 (two hours); Lane v. Steiniger (1916) 174 Iowa 317, 156 N.W. 375 (in excess of five hours); Minkley v. MacFarland (......
-
Lombardo v. D. F. Frangioso & Co.
...... Duffy v. Lipsman-Fulkerson & Co., 200 F.Supp. 71 (D.Mont.1961). Walden v. Coleman, 105 Ga.App. 242, 124 S.E.2d 313 (1962). Mariani v. Nanni, 95 R.I. 153, 185 A.2d 119 ......
-
Novak v. Kansas City Transit, Inc.
...v. Adams (1961), Del.Super., 167 A.2d 717; Brown v. Georgia-Tennessee Coaches (1953), 88 Ga.App. 519, 77 S.E.2d 24; Walden v. Coleman, (1962), 105 Ga.App. 242, 124 S.E.2d 313.5 Cooney v. Moomaw (1953), D.C.Neb., 109 F.Supp. 448; Duffy v. Lipsman-Fulkerson & Co. (1961), D.C.Mont., 200 F.Supp......