## Facts

- A surviving husband brought a wrongful-death action for the death of his wife.
- New York wrongful-death damages are limited to the statutory beneficiaries’ pecuniary loss.
- The defendants sought to admit the decedent’s will, executed about four months before her death, for the limited purpose of showing the nature of the marital relationship and the husband’s probable pecuniary loss.
- The will contained a statement accusing the husband of cruelty, indifference, and failure to support the decedent, and it limited his bequest to one dollar.
- The trial court excluded the will over defendants’ objection.
- The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff; the trial court entered judgment accordingly.
- The Appellate Division affirmed by a divided court, and the defendants appealed as of right.

## Issues

1. Whether, in a wrongful-death action measured by a surviving spouse’s pecuniary loss, the decedent’s recent will was admissible to show the marital relationship and the spouse’s reasonable expectation of future economic benefit.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals reversed and granted a new trial.
- The will was relevant to the nature of the relationship between the decedent and the husband and thus to the extent of the husband’s pecuniary loss.
- The will’s exclusion was erroneous and prejudicial, requiring a new trial.
- Three judges dissented.

## Legal Principles

- Wrongful-death recovery is limited to pecuniary injuries suffered by the statutory beneficiaries.
- Evidence bearing on the decedent’s relationship with the beneficiary is admissible when it tends to show the beneficiary’s reasonable expectation of future economic support or services.
- Statements in a will may be admissible, not for the truth of alleged past misconduct, but to show the decedent’s state of mind and disposition toward the beneficiary as reflected in the instrument.
- When such relationship evidence is improperly excluded and bears materially on pecuniary loss, reversal and a new trial may be required.

## Conclusion

Because the husband’s recovery depended on his probable pecuniary loss, the decedent’s recent will was admissible to help the factfinder assess the marital relationship and the husband’s economic expectancy; excluding it was reversible error, so the judgment for the plaintiff was reversed and the case remanded for a new trial.


Loetsch v. N.Y.C. Omnibus Corp., 291 N.Y. 308, 52 N.E.2d 448 (1943)