Home › Case briefs › Civil Procedure

Fuentes v. Tucker

Supreme Court of California · 1947 · Civil Procedure

Civil ProcedurePleadingsEvidenceWrongful DeathJoinderadmission in answerissues framed by pleadingsirrelevant evidence

Facts

On the day of trial, defendant filed amended answers in each case admitting that he was liable for the deaths of the children and for the damages directly and proximately caused thereby. Despite that admission, plaintiffs were allowed to introduce evidence describing the accident, including that defendant was intoxicated and that the children were thrown 80 feet by the impact. The only remaining disputed matter was the amount of wrongful death damages suffered by the parents. The mothers were also joined as plaintiffs along with the fathers.

Issue

After a defendant makes a full and unqualified admission of liability in the pleadings, may the plaintiff still introduce evidence of the circumstances of the accident when that evidence bears only on liability and not on the remaining issue of damages? Also, in an action for the wrongful death of a minor child, may the mother join as a plaintiff where the statute authorizes only the father to sue?

Rule

Proof must be confined to the issues in the case. When an issue has been completely removed by a clear and unequivocal admission in the pleadings, evidence material solely to that excluded matter is irrelevant and inadmissible; however, evidence of how an accident occurred remains admissible if it is relevant and material to damages still at issue. In a wrongful death action for a minor child, damages consist of the parents' pecuniary loss, including loss of services, earnings, society, comfort, and protection, offset by the cost of support and education. Except in statutory circumstances not present, only the father is authorized to bring the action for death of a minor child.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Sacramento, Dana Ortiz sued Nolan Price for the wrongful death of her 11-year-old son. On the morning of trial, Nolan filed an amended answer admitting that he was liable for the child's death and for the damages directly and proximately caused by it, but Dana still sought to introduce testimony that Nolan had been drag racing and laughing after the collision.

If the only disputed issue left for the jury is the amount of wrongful-death damages, how should the court rule on the testimony about drag racing and Nolan's post-collision behavior?

Explanation. A clear and unequivocal admission in the pleadings removes the admitted issue from the case. Once liability is fully admitted, proof must be confined to the remaining issues. In a wrongful-death action for a minor child, damages are limited to the parents' pecuniary loss, not the defendant's degree of blameworthiness. Evidence of drag racing and post-collision behavior is material only to liability or culpability, so it is irrelevant and inadmissible.