Opinion
No. 18-35206
04-24-2019
ESTATE OF JAMES LEE DIMAGGIO and LORA DIMAGGIO ROBINSON, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
D.C. No. 1:15-cv-00311-EJL MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Idaho
Edward J. Lodge, District Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted February 4, 2019 Seattle, Washington Before: IKUTA and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges, and CHOE-GROVES, Judge.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
The Honorable Jennifer Choe-Groves, Judge for the United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation.
Plaintiffs-Appellants, the Estate of James Lee DiMaggio (Estate) and Lora DiMaggio Robinson (Robinson), appeal the district court's dismissal of their wrongful death claim. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. "We review a dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) de novo." Pareto v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp., 139 F.3d 696, 698-99 (9th Cir. 1998). We reverse the district court's dismissal of Plaintiffs' wrongful death claim and remand for further proceedings.
James Lee Dimaggio (DiMaggio) was shot and killed by FBI agents. DiMaggio is survived by his sister Robinson. Plaintiffs brought an action in the District of Idaho alleging numerous claims, including a wrongful death claim against the United States. Idaho's wrongful death statute provides that "[w]hen the death of a person is caused by the wrongful act or neglect of another, his or her heirs or personal representatives on their behalf may maintain an action for damages against the person causing the death . . . ." Idaho Code Ann. § 5-311(1). Robinson may only maintain a wrongful death action if she qualifies as DiMaggio's "heir" pursuant to the statute, and DiMaggio's Estate may only maintain a wrongful death action as a trustee on behalf of DiMaggio's heirs. See Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. of Idaho v. Eisenman, 286 P.3d 185, 189-90 (Idaho 2012). The only question on appeal is whether Robinson meets the definition of "heirs" provided by Idaho Code Ann. § 5-311(2)(a), which defines "heirs" as "[t]hose persons who would be entitled to succeed to the property of the decedent according to the provisions of subsection (22) of section 15-1-201, Idaho Code." Idaho Code Ann. § 15-1-201(22) is located within Idaho's Uniform Probate Code and states that "'[h]eirs' means those persons, including the surviving spouse, who are entitled under the statutes of intestate succession to the property of a decedent."
DiMaggio's sister Robinson is the only alleged heir. Thus, whether the Estate can maintain a wrongful death action also depends on whether Robinson qualifies as DiMaggio's "heir."
We look to the Idaho statutes of intestate succession to determine whether Robinson is DiMaggio's "heir." Idaho's intestate succession statute provides that the order of intestate succession is: (1) surviving spouse; (2) issue of the decedent; (3) parents of the decedent; (4) issue of the parents; and (5) grandparents of the decedent. Idaho Code Ann. § 15-2-103. It is undisputed that DiMaggio has no surviving spouse, children, or parents. Thus, DiMaggio's sister Robinson is his "heir" pursuant to the Idaho statutes of intestate succession.
Plaintiffs argue on appeal, for the first time, that the court should have looked to the California statutes of intestate succession to determine whether Robinson is DiMaggio's "heir" because DiMaggio was a California resident at the time of his death. Even assuming Plaintiffs did not waive this argument, the Idaho statutes of intestate succession apply. Whitley v. Spokane & Inland Ry. Co., 132 P. 121, 123-24 (Idaho 1913), aff'd sub nom. Spokane & Inland Empire Ry. Co. v. Whitley, 237 U.S. 487 (1915) (looking to the "laws of Idaho" to determine who qualified as a non-resident decedent's heirs).
The district court incorrectly concluded that no heir of DiMaggio could maintain a wrongful death action in Idaho pursuant to subsection (2)(a) because DiMaggio is a California resident with no property in Idaho. See Idaho Code Ann. § 15-1-301. The Idaho Supreme Court has never suggested that the jurisdictional requirements for probating an estate are a prerequisite for maintaining a wrongful death action. See Whitley v. Spokane & Inland Ry. Co., 132 P. 121, 124 (Idaho 1913), aff'd sub nom. Spokane & Inland Empire Ry. Co. v. Whitley, 237 U.S. 487 (1915) (holding that a nonresident decedent's mother qualified as decedent's "heir" for purposes of maintaining a wrongful death action in Idaho, even though the Uniform Probate Code's jurisdictional requirements were not satisfied).
Our dissenting colleague does not explain how Idaho law can be reconciled with her suggested statutory interpretation mandating that the Probate Code's jurisdictional requirements be satisfied. For over a century, Idaho has referred to its intestate succession statutes to determine who qualifies as an heir for purposes of a wrongful death action. Nebeker v. Piper Aircraft Corp., 747 P.2d 18, 22 (Idaho 1987). When the Idaho legislature amended its wrongful death statute to include a statutory definition of heirs, it adopted the Probate Code's definition of "heir," thereby specifying that the intestate succession statutes determine a decedent's heir for purposes of subsection (2)(a) of the wrongful death statute. See id. Idaho has never indicated that the jurisdictional requirements for initiating a probate action—such as probating an estate or administering a trust—apply to a wrongful death action. See, e.g., Whitley, 132 P. at 124. We see no reason to apply the Probate Code's jurisdictional requirements because there is no probate action here. --------
Nebeker v. Piper Aircraft Corp., 747 P.2d 18 (Idaho 1987), does not change our conclusion that Robinson qualifies as DiMaggio's "heir" for purposes of maintaining a wrongful death action. In Nebeker, the Idaho Supreme Court held that only decedent's surviving spouse, and not decedent's children, could bring a wrongful death claim because the children could not satisfy a prerequisite condition imposed by the intestate succession statutes then in effect. 747 P.2d at 20-21. We read Nebeker as holding that if an individual has a contingent interest in the decedent's property, and that contingency has not been satisfied, then that individual is not an "heir" for purposes of maintaining a wrongful death action. Robinson qualifies as DiMaggio's "heir" under subsection (2)(a) of the Idaho wrongful death statute because DiMaggio has no living relatives with greater priority under Idaho's intestate succession statutory scheme, and there is not a condition precedent that Robinson need satisfy before being entitled to inherit DiMaggio's property. Robinson and the Estate (on behalf of Robinson) may maintain a wrongful death action.
REVERSED AND REMANDED Choe-Groves, Judge, dissenting:
I would affirm the district court's dismissal of Lora DiMaggio Robinson's ("Robinson") wrongful death claim based on the plain language of the Idaho state statutes. As noted by the majority, Idaho's wrongful death statute defines "heirs" as "[t]hose persons who would be entitled to succeed to the property of the decedent according to the provisions of subsection (22) of section 15-1-201, Idaho Code." Idaho Code Ann. § 5-311(2)(a). Section 15-1-201 of Idaho's Uniform Probate Code states that "[h]eirs means those persons, including the surviving spouse, who are entitled under the statues of intestate succession to the property of a decedent." Idaho Code Ann. § 15-1-201 (22). Section 15-1-301 of the Probate Code explains that "this code applies to . . . the property of nonresidents located in this state or property coming into the control of a fiduciary who is subject to the laws of this state." Idaho Code Ann. § 15-1-301. Mr. DiMaggio was a non-resident and did not have any property in the state of Idaho. Because Mr. DiMaggio did not have any property in Idaho, Idaho's intestate succession does not apply. Robinson is not an "heir" because she is not "entitled under the statutes of intestate succession to the property of a decedent." There is nothing in the language of the Probate Code to suggest that section 15-1-301 is inapplicable to wrongful death actions.
The majority relies on section 15-2-103 to support the conclusion that Robison is DiMaggio's heir for the purposes of the wrongful death action. Section 15-2-103 only provides the order of intestate succession. See Idaho Code Ann. § 15-2-103 (providing the order of intestate succession if the decedent has no surviving spouse). The Idaho definition of "heir" first looks at the jurisdictional requirements in Section 15-1-301 based on the plain language of the statute as explained above. Because the Probate Code looks first to section 15-1-301, it is improper to find that Robinson is DiMaggio's heir under section 15-2-103 because Idaho's intestate succession does not apply when a non-resident decedent has no property in the state.
The district court properly analyzed section 15-1-301 in concluding that Robinson is not DiMaggio's heir and therefore did not have standing to bring a wrongful death action. I would affirm the district court's ruling and respectfully dissent.