From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Holmes v. Fletcher

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Jun 27, 1963
135 Ind. App. 83 (Ind. Ct. App. 1963)

Opinion

No. 19,807.

Filed June 27, 1963. Rehearing denied August 6, 1963.

ACTION — Negligence — Survival of Actions — Pleading and Practice. — A cause of action for personal injuries does not survive the plaintiff who died from causes other than such personal injuries.

From the Allen Superior Court, No. 3, Lloyd S. Hartzler, Special Judge.

Appellant, Helen L. Holmes, Administratrix of the Estate of Homer Holmes, deceased, filed amended complaint for damages for personal injuries suffered by appellant's decedent. Judgment was rendered favorable to appellees, Sam Fletcher and others. Appellant appeals.

Affirmed. By the Second Division.

Larry J. Burke and Kennerk, Dumas Burke, of Fort Wayne, for appellant. Thomas Logan and Rothberg, Gallmeyer, Strutz, Fruechtenicht Logan, of Fort Wayne, for appellee, Joe Willie Day.

Edward J. Moppert, Jr., and Hoffman, Moppert Solomon, of Fort Wayne, for appellee, Sam Fletcher.

Hunt, Suedhoff Wilks and Leigh L. Hunt, of Fort Wayne, for appellee, Sears, Roebuck Company.


A second amended complaint was filed in the trial court by the appellant which alleged negligence on the part of the appellees, or their agents or employees, on February 27, 1953, proximately causing personal injuries to Homer Holmes, appellant's decedent. The complaint further alleged that the injuries resulted in medical, hospital and nursing expenses, as well as loss of income, to said decedent from the date of injury to the date of his death on February 28, 1959, from causes other than said personal injuries.

Appellees each addressed a demurrer to the second amended complaint on the ground that the pleading did not allege facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and by raising a specific issue of law as to whether a cause of action survived the death of Homer Holmes.

The trial court sustained the demurrer of each appellee to said second amended complaint. Appellant refused to plead over and judgment was rendered as follows:

"It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed by the Court that the said defendant, Sears, Roebuck and Company have and recover of and from the plaintiff the costs of this action, and plaintiff take nothing by her complaint as to defendant, Sears, Roebuck and Company."

"It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed by the Court that the defendants Sam Fletcher and Joe Willie Day have and recover from the plaintiff the costs of this action as herein laid out and expended."

The sole and only question in this appeal is whether a cause of action survived the death of the said Holmes. Appellant concedes that there are no significant differences in the pattern of facts as set forth in the case of Leslie A. Malone, Administrator of the Estate of Sylvester Malone, Decedent v. Ronald J. Conner, in Cause No. 19650, 1 Ind. Dec. 288, 135 Ind. App. 167, 189 N.E.2d 590, decided by this court, Division Number One, on April 18, 1963. In other words, the same question is presented by this appeal as was presented in the Malone case.

On the basis of the conclusion reached in said Malone case we hereby affirm the judgment herein.

Hunter, Kelley, Pfaff, JJ., concur.

NOTE. — Reported in 191 N.E.2d 335.


Summaries of

Holmes v. Fletcher

Court of Appeals of Indiana
Jun 27, 1963
135 Ind. App. 83 (Ind. Ct. App. 1963)
Case details for

Holmes v. Fletcher

Case Details

Full title:HOLMES, ADMINISTRATRIX, ETC. v. FLETCHER ET AL

Court:Court of Appeals of Indiana

Date published: Jun 27, 1963

Citations

135 Ind. App. 83 (Ind. Ct. App. 1963)
191 N.E.2d 335

Citing Cases

Bliss v. Grayson

(Gen. Stats. 3352; Clyburg v. Reynolds, 9 S. E. R. 973, 979, 31 S. C. 91; Fletcher v. Holmes, 25 Ind. 458.) (…

Wall v. Bissell

The principal question in this case is the validity of the release, executed by Abraham G. Barnett, of the…