Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

28 Minn. 5

Nash v. Tousley

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided May 6, 1881

Supreme Court of Minnesota · decided 1881-05-06

Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Le Sueur county, under Gen. St. 1878, c. 77, § 2, to recover damages for the death of his son, occasioned by the alleged negligence of the defendant. Defendant demurred to the complaint because the action should be brought by an executor or administrator of the deceased. Plaintiff appeals from an order by Macdonald, J., sustaining the demurrer.

Relies on Jones v. Tainter · Atkinson v. Duffy

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1881-05-06

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently July 1960

2 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions

40188118901900191019201930194019501960decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Berry, J.

¶1“A cause of action arising out of an injury to the person dies with the person of either party, except as provided in the next section.” Gen. St. 1878, c. 77, § 1. “When death is caused by the wrongful act or omission of any party, the personal representatives of the deceased may maintain an action, if he might have maintained an action, had he lived, for an injury caused by the same act or omission; but the action shall be commenced within two years after the act or omission by which the death was caused. The. dam*6ages thereon cannot exceed $5,000, and the amount recovered is to be for the exclusive benefit of the widow and next of kin, to be distributed to them in the same proportions as the personal property of the deceased person.” Id. § 2. The right of action thus given was wholly unknown to our law before the passage of these provisions of statute. It is, therefore, altogether a creature of the statute, and must be enforced (if at all) as the statute enacts, and not otherwise. The action to enforce it must, therefore, be brought by the “personal representatives of the deceased” — that is to say, by his executor or administrator. Atkinson v. Duffy, 16 Minn. 45, and authorities cited; Jones v. Tainter, 15 Minn. 512; Abbott’s Law Dict. “Represent.”

¶2Order affirmed.

/28/minn/5 · .json · Public domain