Interested in working with us? Call us on 703.591.0067 or fill out this quick form and we will contact you within 24 hours!




Practice Areas

Blog

News

Library

Medical Malpractice

Read All

Car / Truck Accidents

Read All

Birth Injuries

Read All

Brain Injuries

Read All

Spinal Cord Injuries

Read All

Old Firm News

Read All

Brain Injury

Read All

Birth-Related Articles

Read All

Medical Articles

Read All

Significant Court Decisions

Read All

Car / Truck Accidents

Read All

Tort Reform News

Read All

General

Read All

Northern Virginia and Washington D.C. Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyers’ Blog

The personal injury lawyers of Shevlin Smith regularly blog about issues that are important to the rights and recoveries of medical malpractice and personal injury victims in Virginia and Washington D.C.
Blog Category:

Catastrophic Personal Injuries

1/30/2009
Michael J. Shevlin
Comments (0)

Virginia Supreme Court Decisions A Big Victory For Plaintiffs

Last week, the Virignia Supreme Court released its decision in Centra Health, Inc. v. Mullins.  The end result is a big victory for plaintiffs in death cases where the cause of death is contested.

The Central Health case resolved a long-standing issue under Virginia law -- whether a plaintiff has the right to submit both a survival action and a wrongful death action to a jury for resolution at the same time.  Plaintiff's lawyers have long advocated for this right in order to prevent the injustice of picking the wrong cause of action to submit to a jury, and losing a case, not because the defendant did not negligently cause harm, but because the wrong cause of action was chosen. 

Until the Central Health decision, a plaintiff's nightmare scenario occurs under the following facts.  The defendant negligently injures a person and everyone agrees that the defendant was indeed negligent in injuring the other person.  The injured person then dies some time after the initial injury.  The plaintiff and defendant disagree whether the defendant's negligence actually caused the injured person to die, or whether the injured person died from some other cause.  Based upon these facts, two different causes of action were available to the plaintiff - (1) a wrongful death claim in which the plaintiff alleged that the defendant caused the death of the injured person' or (2) a survival action claim inwihch the plaintiff alleged that the defendant caused injury to the injured person but did not cause death.  Prior to Central Health, some trial courts were requiring the plaintiff to elect only one of the two claims to submit to a jury.  The injustice arose when the plaintiff elected the wrongful death claim, but lost at trial because the jury felt the defendant negligently injured the injured person but did not cause that person's death; or when the plaintiff elected the survival action claim, but lost at trial because the jury felt the defendant did negligently cause the injured person's death.

In Central Health, the Virginia Supreme Court recognized the right of plaintiffs to submit both claims to the jury, and allow the jury to decide which of the two claims was the right one under the evidence presented.  Under this decision, plaintiffs no longer face the prospect of losing a case where the defendant is admittedly negligent on the grounds that the wrong type of claim was elected.       

Bookmark and Share


Let us help you

Name:

Phone:

Email:

Tell us more:


Shevlin Smith
3975 University Drive
Suite 405
Fairfax, VA 22030
Phone: (703) 591-0067
Fax: (703) 591-1877

Get Directions

FAQs

General Questions

Car / Truck Accidents

Birth Injuries

Medical Malpractice

Brain Injuries

Spinal Cord Injuries

Catastrophic Injuries

View All