The wrongful death and loss of consortium cases are often treated as separate and distinct. The plaintiff claims that the courts have recognized loss-of-consortium claims, but she cites cases that are both inapposite and irrelevant. For example, the cases she cites do not discuss the primary rights doctrine or res judicata, which makes them useless analogies. A better analogy would be to look at the plaintiff’s actual claim of loss of consortium.
The plaintiff’s complaint alleges that the surgeries she had caused the loss of consortium. However, the complaint does not specify which surgeries she underwent or which medication she took. She claims that she was deprived of sexual intercourse due to the scarring and muscle wasting she developed after the surgery. The court must determine whether this claim should be dismissed or allowed to proceed. The plaintiff should also be allowed to present evidence of the actual surgery that she underwent to prove that she suffered loss of consortium.
In the plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, she alleges loss of consortium. In response, the defendant moves to dismiss on grounds of statutory limitations, collateral estoppel, and failure to state a claim. Nonetheless, the plaintiff may continue to make amends to the complaint. The defendant may be able to appeal the decision. However, the plaintiff may not receive the relief that she seeks. In order to obtain compensation, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant’s conduct caused her pain and suffering.
