# Weeks v. Cessna Aircraft Co.

> Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · December 6, 1994 · 895 P.2d 731

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9846600

## Case

- **Full name:** Bobbie Jean WEEKS, Appellant, v. the CESSNA AIRCRAFT COMPANY, a Corporation; Sky-Craft Aviation, Inc., a Corporation; And Charles Graves and Roger Graves, Individually, in Partnership, and/or D/B/A Sky-Craft Aviation, Appellees
- **Court:** Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma
- **Decided:** December 6, 1994
- **Citations:** 895 P.2d 731; 1994 OK CIV APP 171; 1994 Okla. Civ. App. LEXIS 190; 1995 WL 297291
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Reif
- **Judges:** Boudreau, Rapp, Reif
- **Cited by:** 49 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9846600

## Opinion text

REIF, Chief Judge,
specially concurring.
I concur fully with the majority opinion and write specially only to emphasize that there are no jurisdictional impediments to substitution of a personal representative to prosecute a cause of action that is otherwise cognizable and timely filed. In Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. Wulf, 226 U.S. 570, 575 , 38 S.Ct. 135,137 , 57 L.Ed. 355 (1913), the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the substitution of a personal representative in a Federal Employers Liability Act case that had been originally filed by the parent of the deceased as a wrongful death diversity case. The Supreme Court observed that the case was cognizable from the outset as a FELA action, even though it was pleaded as a wrongful death suit with no mention of FELA and was brought by the parent in her individual capacity. The court approved the later substitution of the personal representative to prosecute the action as required by FELA, despite the fact that the substitution occurred after the running of the statute of limitations. The court held that “[t]he change was in form rather than in substance [and] introduced no new or different cause of action, nor did it set up any different state of facts as the ground of action, and therefore it related back to the beginning of the suit.” Id. at 576 , 33 S.Ct. at 137 .
The same can be said of the instant wrongful death case brought by the decedent’s parent rather than by the personal representative pursuant to statutory preference. The later substitution of the personal representative will not change the action even though the statute of limitations has passed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9846600. Public record. Not legal advice.