Sharon, I'm no lawyer, but about 20 years ago I was a juror on an asbestos trial. There were 4 plaintiffs who had been harmed by exposure to asbestos, 2 of whom were deceased. So, Sharon, I believe the answer is yes, at least in more current years. It is possible that laws could have changed since the era of interest to you. Billie Elias www.genealogygal.wordpress.com On Dec 29, 2014 12:28 PM, "sharon via" < [email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi all, > I have questions regarding California civil dispute in Fresno Superior > Court in 1952 before Judge Popovich, according to a 1952 article in the > Fresno Bee newspaper. I don't know the case name but it was probably > something like Katherine M. Atwood (first named plaintiff--I don't know > who she was), et al vs. Mrs. Commilla Elwood, et al. I don't know the > disposition of the case. It probably was not a case of record (not > published in any court reporter). > The article named as plaintiffs deceased descendants (including my great > grandmother, who died in 1933) of a deceased > man, George Wiseman (1837-1909), who in 1899 helped to discover oil in > Kern River and whose descendants would have been entitled to receive > royalties from oil company shares were they living. > The defendant, Mrs. Commilla Elwood, was the spouse of another deceased > man, Burton Elwood, who helped > to discover the oil, and in 1939 all the discovers pooled their shares and > assigned them to Burton in trust that he would make appropriate > distributions, which he did. However, at his death his wife said the trust > arrangement was good only during his lifetime and that she need not > distribute any > royalties to the others. > Of George Wiseman's entitled descendants only two were living in 1952, but > others, including my great grandmother, were named as plaintiffs. > 1. Can deceased descendants be named plaintiffs in a lawsuit? > 2. I suppose if I wrote Fresno County Superior > Court I could gain information about the complaints and responses, and > disposition, right? > Sharon Whitney > > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word > 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

There is a mineral rights case in Zapata County TX in which right at 3,000 plaintiffs are named. Perhaps a year after the judge declared for the plaintiffs, an older family member named in the case - and a pretty good amateur genealogist - met with me. She showed where about 300 of the names were spouses of heirs, but not legal heirs. Approximately 65 were deceased well before the suit was filed, with no mention of them being deceased. Nor was the "heirs and assigns" language in the document. That declaration of heirship is filled with "legal fiction." I looked for the case file for the cause number, but this client work is so old that it must be in storage. Ten years ago I focused my business on forensic genealogy. My thoughts were - it's the law, it will be all black and white. Pfffft. Far from it. A probate attorney email list I monitor is filled with contradictory advice from some of the top probate attorneys in the state, examples of case law that don't seem to agree, examples of how something in the family code conflicts with something in the probate code, and occasionally requests for advice for how the current attorney on a case can clean up a mess created by the previous attorney. Jokes to the contrary, attorneys and judges are human. Not all of them are as educated as others, not all are as industrious as others, not all are as ethical as others. They make mistakes, they misinterpret, details can slip past them, and sometimes they take what they have and just punt. It's called "arguing" because it's recognized that there are differing opinions and laws that may apply. And that's why there are appeals courts. Sometimes when we see things like this in genealogy, the answer seems to be - it just is. As Michael Ramage pointed out, you can't legally sue a dead person (as determined by jurisdiction). But dead people do get named in suits. We can research all the laws and possibilities. But, was it lack of knowledge of death, an interpretation of the law, a typo that wasn't removed, or a long punt? Sometimes the answer is - it just is. Dee > On December 31, 2014 at 6:38 AM Billie Elias via > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Sharon, > I'm no lawyer, but about 20 years ago I was a juror on an asbestos trial. > There were 4 plaintiffs who had been harmed by exposure to asbestos, 2 of > whom were deceased. > > So, Sharon, I believe the answer is yes, at least in more current years. It > is possible that laws could have changed since the era of interest to you. > > Billie Elias > www.genealogygal.wordpress.com -- Dee Dee King, Certified Genealogist (sm), Certificate 903 Forensic Genealogy Services LLC Contract Genealogist, US Navy POW/MIA Branch Mail address - PO Box 1085, Manvel TX 77578 Telephone/fax 281-595-3090 www.forensicgenealogyservices.com www.facebook.com/forensicgenealogist Certified Genealogist (CG) is a service mark (sm) of the Board for Certification of Genealogists®, conferred to associates who consistently meet ethical and competency standards in accord with peer-reviewed evaluations every five years, and the board name is registered in the US Patent & Trademark Office.