Court: Children's services count in damage awards

Services that children performed for their dependent parents may be considered in computing damages in wrongful death cases, the same way as if the children had paid to obtain the services, the Washington state Supreme Court ruled Thursday.

The nine justices unanimously overturned a three-judge panel of the state Court of Appeals and reinstated an award of more than $1.3 million to Josie and Warren Armantrout of Auburn. A King County Superior Court jury awarded the Armantrouts the judgment in a medical malpractice lawsuit against Cascade Orthopaedics of Auburn.

"This case makes the law clear that parents can be dependent on their adult children and not just for money," said Simeon J. Osborn, the Armantrouts' lawyer.

The case stems from the death of the couple's daughter, 18-year-old Kristen Armantrout, of a pulmonary embolism in August 2003, two weeks after undergoing surgery on her left ankle.

In the Armantrouts' wrongful death lawsuit, evidence showed that Josie Armantrout, a former Seattle Times executive assistant who had become blind and diabetic, relied on her daughter for driving, reading, glucose monitoring, injections and other services. The young woman also contributed a $588 monthly disability check toward household expenses.

Judge Palmer Robinson told jurors they could consider the $36,553 annual value of the services in determining whether the mother was entitled to damages as a dependent under state law. The panel found that the parents were "substantially financially dependent" and awarded them $1.15 million, along with a $200,000 award to Kristen Armantrout's estate.

Cascade asserted that a finding of dependency should hinge on monetary support, and the appeals panel ruled that Robinson's jury instructions "misstated the law because ... conferring services and other benefits does not constitute financial support."

In the high court's ruling, Justice Barbara A. Madsen said that view "would lead to absurd results and unfair application of the long-standing legislatively created right to an action for wrongful death."

"Parents who received monetary contributions from their adult child to purchase valuable services would qualify as statutory beneficiaries, but parents who received those exact same services from their adult child would not," Madsen wrote. "Nothing in the statute indicates the legislature intended such a level of incongruity."