In California, Code of Civil Procedure section 377.60 defines who may bring a wrongful death action, and it is a hierarchy rather than an open list: the surviving spouse or domestic partner, children, and issue of deceased children come first; if there is no surviving issue, standing passes to those entitled to the decedent’s property by intestate succession; and certain financially dependent people can bring a claim whether or not they qualify under either.
There is a second question that matters just as much and is almost always missed: California treats wrongful death as a single action. So the issue is not only who may file, but who must be included in the one case that gets filed.
Key Points
- Standing is statutory. A close relationship to the person who died does not by itself create a right to sue.
- It is a hierarchy: where a spouse, domestic partner, or children survive, more distant relatives generally do not have standing.
- California does not recognise common-law marriage, so an unmarried partner may have no standing unless they qualify as a putative spouse or a dependent.
- Only one wrongful death action may be brought for a single death. All known heirs must be joined.
- An heir who is left out is not barred from recovering — the consequence falls on the defendant, not on the omitted heir. Published summaries frequently get this backwards.
- Heirs’ interests can diverge, which raises questions about whether one lawyer can represent all of them.
The Three Routes to Standing
1. The primary heirs
Under section 377.60(a), the action may be asserted by the decedent’s surviving spouse, domestic partner, children, and issue of deceased children — so grandchildren step into the place of a child of the decedent who has also died.
Where the decedent’s parents would be entitled to bring the action and the parents are themselves deceased, the decedent’s legal guardians may bring it as if they were the parents.
2. Intestate succession, where there is no surviving issue
If there is no surviving issue of the decedent, standing passes to the persons — including a surviving spouse or domestic partner — who would be entitled to the decedent’s property by intestate succession. That is the route by which parents and siblings can acquire standing, and it is why the answer sometimes depends on California’s intestate succession rules rather than on the wrongful death statute alone.
The practical effect is a sequence. Where a spouse, domestic partner, or children survive, the enquiry usually stops there. Only where those categories are empty does the next class of heirs come into it.
3. Financially dependent people
Section 377.60(b) allows certain people to bring a claim whether or not they qualify above, provided they were dependent on the decedent:
- A putative spouse — someone who believed in good faith that they were lawfully married to the decedent — and the children of a putative spouse
- Stepchildren
- Parents
- The legal guardians of the decedent, if the parents are deceased
Dependency is the condition. A stepchild or parent who was not financially dependent on the decedent does not gain standing through this route.
Section 377.60 also provides for a minor who, whether or not otherwise qualified, lived in the decedent’s household for the 180 days before the death and was dependent on the decedent for support.
And the estate’s representative
The decedent’s personal representative may assert the action on behalf of the people entitled to bring it. That is a procedural route rather than a separate entitlement — the representative sues as a trustee for the heirs, not in place of them.
Who Does Not Have Standing
This is the harder half of the answer and the reason people search the question.
- An unmarried partner, unless they were a registered domestic partner, qualify as a putative spouse, or were a dependent. California does not recognise common-law marriage, and length of relationship does not substitute for it.
- Stepchildren and parents who were not financially dependent on the decedent.
- Siblings, where a spouse, domestic partner, or children survive. Siblings reach standing only through intestate succession, which generally requires those closer categories to be empty.
- Friends, unmarried co-parents who were not dependents, and other people close to the decedent without a statutory basis.
None of this reflects how much someone mattered to the person who died. It is a statutory allocation, and where it produces an unfair-feeling result, that is a limitation of the statute rather than a judgement about the relationship.
The One-Action Rule
This is the part of the answer with the most practical consequence, and the part published summaries most often state incorrectly.
California treats a wrongful death claim as joint, single, and indivisible. The California Supreme Court set out the rule in Cross v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (1964) 60 Cal.2d 690, and the Court of Appeal explained the three terms in Ruttenberg v. Ruttenberg (1997) 53 Cal.App.4th 801:
- Joint — all heirs should join or be joined in the action, and a single verdict should be rendered for all recoverable damages.
- Single — only one action for wrongful death may be brought, whether it is instituted by all or only one of the heirs, or by the personal representative as trustee for the heirs.
- Indivisible — there cannot be a series of suits by heirs against the tortfeasor for their individual damages.
The statute has been described as a procedural rule of compulsory joinder rather than one creating a genuinely joint cause of action: each heir has a separate claim that is required to be joined with the others. The practical duty falls on whoever files. An heir bringing the action has a duty to join all known heirs, and an heir who will not participate as a plaintiff may be named as a defendant so that everyone is before the court in the same case — a nominal defendant who is, in substance, a plaintiff.
What happens if an heir is left out
Here is the point worth reading twice, because Google’s own AI answer for this question currently states the opposite.
An omitted heir does not lose the right to recover by being left out. In Ruttenberg an omitted heir was described as a necessary party but not an indispensable one — a court has jurisdiction to try the action without them. And where a defendant settles with fewer than all known heirs, the defendant loses the protection of the single-action rule: the non-settling heirs may continue to pursue the action, and the defendant cannot use that settlement as a bar.
So the risk created by omission runs against the defendant, not against the heir who was left out. That does not make omission harmless — an omitted heir may have to bring proceedings and the outcome is worse for everyone — but if you have been left out of a family member’s wrongful death case, being told your rights are gone is not the law.
How a Recovery Is Divided
Because one action covers all the heirs, a lump sum has to be apportioned among them. That allocation is a matter between the heirs; California courts have held that neither a trial nor a settling defendant has any interest in how the heirs divide it. Where the heirs cannot agree, the court can determine their respective rights in the award.
Where Heirs’ Interests Diverge
Worth naming, because nobody advertising in this space mentions it. Heirs are not always aligned. A surviving spouse and adult children from an earlier marriage may have very different views about the case and very different claims within it, and the size of each heir’s share can be genuinely contested.
That raises a real question about whether one lawyer can properly represent every heir in the same action, and it is a question worth asking a firm directly rather than discovering later. In some cases separate representation is the right answer.
Deadlines
Most California wrongful death actions must be filed within two years of the death under Code of Civil Procedure section 335.1. A substantially shorter timeline applies where a public entity may share responsibility, and deaths resulting from medical care are governed by different limitations rules. Our wrongful death page covers the claim generally, including how it differs from the survival action that belongs to the estate.
Wrongful Death Claims on the Peninsula
Our office at 15 North Ellsworth Avenue, Suite 105, San Mateo, CA 94401 handles these claims across San Mateo County, and civil matters for this area are generally heard in the San Mateo County Superior Court. More about the office is on our San Mateo page.
How Vaksman Khalfin Can Help
The first work in a wrongful death case is identifying every person with standing under section 377.60 and making sure the single action is brought correctly — which is both a legal question and, often, a family one. We can also assess whether an heir’s interests are aligned with the others or need separate representation, preserve evidence before it is released or altered, identify every party and policy involved, and protect deadlines that run from the death rather than from anything a criminal case does.
Our California personal injury practice is led by Alan D. Khalfin, admitted in California. We handle these matters on a contingency-fee basis: there is no upfront attorney’s fee, and attorney’s fees are owed only if we recover compensation for you. Case costs are a separate category from attorney’s fees, and how both are handled is set out in the written fee agreement we go through with you before anything is signed. Initial consultations are free.
To speak with a California wrongful death attorney, call 650-250-0705 or schedule a free consultation. Related reading: our California personal injury guides.
Reviewed by Alan D. Khalfin, Partner and Managing Attorney, Vaksman Khalfin, PC (admitted in California). Last reviewed: 09/15/2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Under Code of Civil Procedure section 377.60: the decedent's surviving spouse or domestic partner, children, and issue of deceased children; or, where there is no surviving issue, those entitled to the decedent's property by intestate succession. Separately, certain financially dependent people may bring a claim whether or not they otherwise qualify — a putative spouse and their children, stepchildren, parents, and the decedent's legal guardians where the parents are deceased. A minor who lived in the decedent's household for the previous 180 days and depended on them may also have standing. The decedent's personal representative may bring the action on behalf of those entitled.
Only in limited circumstances. California does not recognise common-law marriage, so a long-term partner who was not married and not a registered domestic partner generally has no standing unless they qualify as a putative spouse — someone who believed in good faith they were lawfully married — or as a financial dependent. Length of relationship alone is not enough.
Sometimes. Siblings and parents generally reach standing through intestate succession, which requires the closer categories — spouse or domestic partner, children, issue of deceased children — to be absent. Parents can also bring a claim if they were financially dependent on the decedent, whether or not they qualify by succession.
No. California treats the claim as joint, single, and indivisible: only one action may be brought for a single death, and all known heirs should join or be joined in it. An heir who will not participate as a plaintiff may be named as a defendant so everyone is before the court in the same case.
The omitted heir does not lose their right to recover. A non-joined heir is a necessary party but not an indispensable one, and where a defendant settles with fewer than all known heirs, the defendant loses the protection of the single-action rule — the non-settling heirs may continue to pursue the action. Some published summaries state the opposite; they are wrong on this point.
Because one action covers everyone, a lump sum is apportioned among the heirs. That allocation is a matter between them, and California courts have held that a defendant has no interest in how it is divided. Where the heirs cannot agree, the court can determine their respective rights in the award.
Usually an insurer — the at-fault driver's liability carrier, a business's liability policy, or a commercial policy where a company vehicle or employee was involved. The coverage available frequently constrains what is realistically recoverable, because a judgment against someone with no insurance and no assets is difficult to collect.
There is no general answer and no lawyer can predict an outcome. The elements are the same as any negligence claim — duty, breach, causation, and damages — and in practice causation and the extent of the survivors' losses absorb most of the effort. A case with clear liability and documented losses sits very differently from one where fault is contested.
