## Facts

- Antone J. Ottomeier murdered his wife, Anna C. Ottomeier, and shortly thereafter committed suicide.
- Mamie Rose Ottomeier was appointed executrix of both Antone’s estate and Anna’s estate.
- Gordon Johnson, Anna’s surviving son, petitioned the probate court to remove Mamie as executrix of Anna’s estate and to appoint him administrator with the will annexed.
- Johnson alleged a wrongful death cause of action accrued to Anna’s estate against Antone’s estate for the benefit of Anna’s children, and that Mamie could not pursue it due to her dual fiduciary roles.
- The probate court dismissed the petition, effectively treating the claimed wrongful death action as unavailable against the husband’s estate under these circumstances.

## Issues

1. Whether the personal representative of a wife may maintain a wrongful death action against the husband’s estate when the husband killed the wife and then died.
2. Whether interspousal tort immunity (the wife’s inability to sue her husband during coverture) bars a wrongful death action brought after death for the benefit of statutory beneficiaries.
3. Whether a personal representative’s conflict of interest (serving as fiduciary for both estates) supports removal to permit prosecution of the wrongful death claim.

## Decision

- The Washington Supreme Court reversed the order dismissing Johnson’s petition.
- The Court held that Anna’s personal representative may maintain a wrongful death action against Antone’s estate for the benefit of the children.
- The Court rejected use of interspousal tort immunity as a defense to this wrongful death claim because it is a personal disability, not a defense that inheres in the tort.
- Because a viable claim existed and the same person served as representative of both estates, the asserted conflict supported removing the executrix of Anna’s estate so the claim could be pursued by an independent representative.

## Legal Principles

- Washington’s wrongful death statute authorizes an action by the decedent’s personal representative against the person causing death, for the benefit of specified beneficiaries, including the decedent’s children, and contains no express bar for claims involving spouses or their estates.
- In wrongful death actions, defenses based on the decedent’s personal disability to sue (such as interspousal tort immunity during marriage) do not apply; only defenses that inhere in the tort or arise from the decedent’s conduct after injury and before death may carry over.
- A wrongful death claim is a statutory cause of action for the benefit of beneficiaries arising upon death, and is not defeated merely because the decedent could not have sued the tortfeasor during life due to a personal incapacity.

## Conclusion

The court recognized a wrongful death claim by a murdered wife’s estate against the murderer-husband’s estate for the children’s benefit and held that interspousal immunity, as a personal disability, does not bar the statutory action; the executrix’s dual representation created a conflict justifying removal to allow prosecution of the claim.


Johnson v. Ottomeier, 45 Wash. 2d 419, 275 P.2d 723 (Wash. 1954)