Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

defendantjurisdictionstatuteappealsummary judgmentlegislative intent
damagesstatutetrialmotionsummary judgmentrespondentmotion for summary judgment

Related Cases

Smejkal v. Empire Lite-Rock, Inc., 274 Or. 571, 547 P.2d 1363
View Case »
Alvord-Polk, Inc. v. F. Schumacher & Co., 37 F.3d 996, 63 USLW 2290, 1994-2 Trade Cases P 70,741
View Case »
Physicians Plus Ins. Corp. v. Midwest Mut. Ins. Co., 254 Wis.2d 77, 2002 WI 80, 646 N.W.2d 777
View Case »
Berry v. Watchtower Bible and Tract Soc. of New York, Inc., 152 N.H. 407, 879 A.2d 1124
View Case »
Berrier v. Simplicity Mfg., Inc., 563 F.3d 38, Prod.Liab.Rep. (CCH) P 18,217
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Crosby v. Glasscock Trucking Co., Inc., 340 S.C. 626, 532 S.E.2d 856

Facts

The case arose when Kristie Crosby, who was twenty weeks pregnant, was involved in a vehicular collision with a truck owned and operated by Glasscock Trucking Co., Inc. The fetus she was carrying was nonviable at the time of the accident and was delivered stillborn later that day. The personal representative of the estate of the stillborn child initiated a wrongful death action against the mother and the trucking company, leading to the summary judgment that was appealed.

Respondent Kristie Crosby was twenty weeks pregnant when she was injured in a automobile accident. The car she was driving collided with a truck owned and operated by respondent Glasscock Trucking Co., Inc. It is undisputed the fetus Kristie was carrying was nonviable at the time of the accident.

Issue

Whether a nonviable stillborn fetus may maintain a wrongful death action under South Carolina law.

The sole issue before this Court is whether a cause of action exists under the South Carolina wrongful death statute, S.C.Code Ann. § 15–51–10 (1976), for the negligently induced stillbirth of a nonviable fetus.

Rule

The South Carolina wrongful death statute, S.C.Code Ann. § 15–51–10, requires the death of a 'person' caused by a wrongful act, neglect, or default of another for a cause of action to exist.

Whenever the death of a person shall be caused by the wrongful act, neglect or default of another and the act, neglect or default is such as would, if death had not ensued, have entitled the party injured to maintain an action and recover damages in respect thereof…

Analysis

The court applied the rule by referencing previous cases, particularly West v. McCoy, which established that a nonviable stillborn fetus cannot maintain a wrongful death action. The court emphasized that the statute's language and the legislative intent do not support extending the definition of 'person' to include nonviable fetuses. The court also noted that allowing such actions would contradict the established legal framework and the majority view among jurisdictions.

Consistent with our decision in West, the majority of courts have held a nonviable stillborn fetus cannot maintain an independent wrongful death action.

Conclusion

The court concluded that a nonviable stillborn fetus may not maintain a wrongful death action, affirming the lower court's summary judgment in favor of the defendants.

Accordingly, the order granting respondents' motion for summary judgment is AFFIRMED.

Who won?

The prevailing party was Kristie Crosby and Glasscock Trucking Co., Inc., as the court upheld the summary judgment in their favor, determining that the wrongful death statute does not apply to nonviable stillborn fetuses.

The trial judge granted respondents' motion for summary judgment on the ground a nonviable stillborn fetus cannot maintain such an action.

You must be