Lamont v. Wolfe

In Lamont v. Wolfe (1983) 142 Cal. App. 3d 375, husband and wife filed a joint action arising from personal injuries sustained by the wife. She sued for negligence, and he sued for loss of consortium. The wife later died from her injuries, and over a year after her death--after the statute of limitations had expired--the husband sought to add a claim of wrongful death to his existing claim for loss of consortium. The court allowed the amendment: "Both complaints issue from the same negligent acts of defendants and the same injuries to Mr. Lamont." (Id. at p. 379.) The Court held: "The injuries suffered by Ronald Lamont as husband suing for loss of consortium and as heir suing for wrongful death are personal to him and include the same elements of loss of love, companionship, affection, society, sexual relations, and solace. Citation. The identity of the parties and the injuries distinguishes the case at bar from cases such as Dominguez v. City of Alhambra (1981) 118 Cal. App. 3d 237, and Shelton v. Superior Court (1976), cited by defendants. In those cases one plaintiff sought to relate back his own independent cause of action to a complaint filed by another plaintiff for the violation of a different right. Here the plaintiff's wrongful death action like his claim for loss of consortium is personal to him. Both actions are entirely distinct from any cause of action Berniece Lamont could have maintained during her lifetime." (Lamont, at p. 380.)