Geoffrey Dugger v. Mary Ann Arredondo, Individually and as Representative of the Estate of Joel Martinez
408 S.W.3d 825
| Tex. | 2013Background
- Wrongful death suit; Arredondo sues Dugger for Martinez's death; Dugger asserts unlawful acts doctrine as defense.
- Trial court granted summary judgment for Dugger on unlawful acts doctrine; appellate court reversed, saying §93.001 supersedes the doctrine.
- Court grants review to assess viability of unlawful acts doctrine under Chapter 33 (proportionate responsibility) and §93.001.
- Chapter 33 replaced all-or-nothing defenses with proportionate responsibility for torts, including wrongful death.
- Court holds unlawful acts doctrine cannot coexist with Chapter 33; recoveries are apportioned rather than barred.
- Opinion affirms appellate court, remanding for proceedings consistent with proportionate responsibility framework.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Chapter 33 abrogate the unlawful acts doctrine? | Arredondo argues Chapter 33 abrogates the doctrine. | Dugger argues the doctrine can still apply or coexist. | No coexistence; Chapter 33 controls. |
| Does §93.001 preserve the unlawful acts doctrine? | Arredondo argues §93.001 preserves the doctrine. | Dugger argues §93.001 narrowly limits it. | §93.001 is narrow and does not broadly preserve the doctrine. |
| Is the unlawful acts doctrine a viable defense in wrongful death actions under Chapter 33? | Arredondo contends doctrine remains viable. | Dugger contends it is abrogated by Chapter 33. | Not viable; Chapter 33 abrogates the doctrine in wrongful death. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gulf, C. & S.F. Ry. Co. v. Johnson, 71 Tex. 619 (Tex. 1888) (unlawful acts doctrine applied in tort contexts)
- Russell v. Ingersoll-Rand Co., 841 S.W.2d 343 (Tex. 1992) (defenses available against decedent may be asserted against estate)
- Parker v. Highland Park, Inc., 565 S.W.2d 512 (Tex. 1978) (before Chapter 33, contributory negligence defenses evolved to comparative fault)
- Smith v. Sewell, 858 S.W.2d 350 (Tex. 1993) (treatment of intoxicated plaintiff under tort recovery framework)
- JCW Elecs., Inc. v. Garza, 257 S.W.3d 701 (Tex. 2008) (evolution of comparative fault in Texas)