MAERINE STOKES, INDIVIDUALLY, AND ARTHUR LEE STOKES, APPELLANTS,
v.
LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, A MASSACHUSETTS CORPORATION AUTHORIZED TO DO BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA AS AN INSUROR, AND THE AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION, A NEW YORK CORPORATION, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Maerine and Arthur Stokes sought recovery for the wrongful death of their stillborn child under Florida's Wrongful Death of Minors Act (§ 768.03). The court affirmed the lower court's ruling that the statute applies only to minor children born alive and does not extend to stillborn fetuses.
The statute applies only to minor children and does not extend to stillborn fetuses. The plain language of the statute uses the words 'minor child,' and the court will not expand the statute's scope through liberal construction to include fetuses.
“We are of the opinion that, had the Legislature intended to extend parental recovery to other than minor children, it would have undoubtedly used appropriate words to do so as it has in § 737.01, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.”
Establishes the court's plain language interpretation principle and shows the Legislature knew how to extend recovery beyond minor children
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMrs. Stokes was approximately seven months pregnant when she was injured by an uninsured motorist. The injury resulted in the death of her stillborn c…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Declaratory Decree cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellee, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, filed a complaint for declaratory decree alleging that the defendants, Mae-rine and Arthur Stokes, had sought arbitration before the American Arbitration Association, pursuant to the terms of an uninsured motorist clause in a Liberty Mutual Insurance Company policy. Defendants’ claim was based upon § 768.03,1 Fla.Stat., F.S.A., for the wrongful death of a stillborn child, which was the result of the negligence of an uninsured motorist. The circuit court took jurisdiction of the matter and rendered its decree, holding that § 768.03, supra, is limited by its terms to “minor child”, and is therefore, not applicable to a stillborn fetus which never lives as a child, apart from its mother’s body.
It was stipulated that Mrs. Stokes was about seven months pregnant and that the question of viability was immaterial to a determination by the chancellor. The parties further stipulated that the sole issue was a question of law.
Defendants’ only point- on appeal is whether there is a cause of action under the Wrongful Death of Minors Act, § 768.03, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., for the death of a stillborn child resulting from prenatal injuries. It is appellants’ contention that the words “minor child” as used in the statute also meant fetus and that the chancellor erred in construing the statute otherwise.
This is a case of first impression in this state.2 However, we feel that the answer is clearly discernable from the plain language of the statute, which uses the words “minor child”. We are of the opinion that, had the Legislature intended to extend parental recovery to other than minor children, it would have undoubtedly used appropriate words to do so as it has in § 737.01, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.
*796We are unable to accept the contention of appellants that this court should, by liberal construction of § 768.03, supra, conclude that a stillborn fetus is a “minor” within the meaning of the statute. This would require us to write into the act words and meanings which are not apparent.
We agree with the construction placed upon the statute and the conclusion reached by the chancellor. Therefore, the decree appealed is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Maerine Stokes v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 213 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 1968)…ct court of appeal which passes upon a question of great public interest according to the accompanying certificate which brings with it our jurisdiction to decide the matter. Fla.Const. Art. V, § 4(2), F.S.A.; Stokes v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., 202 So. 2d 794 (3d Dist.Ct.App.Fla.1967). The question which we must answer is suggested by the certificate: Whether parents have a cause of action under the Wrongful Death of Minors Act, Fla. Stat. § 768.03 (1965), F.S.A., for the death of a stillborn child resu…