## Facts

- Eric Ueland, a Seattle City Light lineman, suffered severe and permanent mental and physical disabilities after being struck by a metal cable at work.
- His minor children, Kimberly and William Ueland, sued through their mother and guardian, Shelley M. Ueland, alleging loss of parental consortium resulting from their father’s catastrophic injuries.
- At the time of the accident, the parents were separated and pursuing divorce.
- Defendants (including Reynolds Metals Company and North Coast Electric Company) argued Washington law did not recognize a child’s independent consortium claim for a living, injured parent.
- The trial court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss; discretionary review was granted, and the case reached the Washington Supreme Court to decide whether such a claim exists as a matter of law.

## Issues

1. Whether Washington law permits minor children to bring an independent cause of action for loss of parental consortium when a parent suffers a nonfatal injury caused by another’s negligence.
2. If such a claim exists, what limitations may be imposed to control duplicative litigation, double recovery, and speculative damages.

## Decision

- The court held that minor children may bring a separate tort action for loss of parental consortium when a parent is injured through the negligence of another, subject to limitations described in the opinion.
- The court affirmed the trial court’s denial of the motion to dismiss, allowing the children’s consortium claims to proceed.
- The court revisited prior Washington authority rejecting children’s consortium claims and concluded the legal and policy premises for rejection had materially changed.

## Legal Principles

- Washington recognizes a minor child’s independent claim for loss of parental consortium arising from a negligently inflicted, nonfatal injury to a parent.
- The child’s consortium loss is a distinct relational injury and is not adequately protected by treating the loss solely as an element of the injured parent’s damages.
- Limiting conditions may include:
  - restricting plaintiffs to minor children;
  - requiring a serious, significant, and long-term impairment of the parent’s ability to provide the ordinary incidents of parental consortium (such as love, care, and guidance);
  - requiring a genuine parent–child relationship at the time of injury; and
  - using procedural measures (including joinder where feasible) to reduce multiple suits, inconsistent outcomes, and double recovery.
- Concerns about nonpecuniary and hard-to-measure damages do not categorically bar recovery where tort law already compensates comparable harms (including spousal consortium and wrongful-death relational losses), and trial management can address overlap.

## Conclusion

Washington law permits minor children to sue independently for loss of parental consortium when a parent suffers a serious, nonfatal injury caused by negligence, with the claim controlled by substantive and procedural limits aimed at preventing duplicative litigation and double recovery.


Ueland v. Pengo Hydra-Pull Corp., 691 P.2d 190 (Wash. 1984)