By

Kristiana Stiles

On December 8, 2023, an Illinois appeals court judge held that a plaintiff’s wrongful death claim on behalf of her son was required to be arbitrated under the arbitration agreement that her son signed.¹ This ruling showcases the interaction between decedent-signed arbitration agreements and wrongful death claims brought by survivors. As shown by this case, arbitration agreements can be binding after the death, even murder, of the signee.²

Christine White, the plaintiff in White v. Wright, sued Uber for the death of her son, Joseph Schelstraete.³ Schelstraete was an Uber driver who was murdered by an individual using a fake Uber account that had planned to rob him.⁴ The defendants moved to compel arbitration under the arbitration clause that Schelstraete had been required to agree to in order to register and work as an Uber driver.⁵ The circuit court partially granted Uber’s motion but specifically denied it for White’s wrongful death claims.⁶

According to the plaintiff, the area where Schelstraete was murdered was already known to be dangerous. Approximately three weeks before Schelstraete’s murder, a different “rideshare diver” had been carjacked.⁷ Within the three months before that, an additional two rideshare drivers were shot.⁸ All of these incidents took place within a five-mile radius of Schelstraete’s murder.⁹ Based upon that and previous issues regarding fake profile use, White claimed that the defendants “knew or should have known that individuals using fake profiles were likely to commit violent crimes against drivers.”¹⁰ Alongside that allegation, White accused Uber of negligence due to failure to use reasonable care in the design and use of its application, which resulted in the murder of White’s son.¹¹

At the appeals court, the issue came down to a conflict of laws discussion. According to Uber, the agreement that Schelstraete signed had a choice-of-law provision that selected Indiana law.¹² Plaintiff argued that Illinois law should apply because Schelstraete’s children, who would receive the benefits from the wrongful death claim, had neither signed an arbitration agreement nor a choice of law provision.¹³

The appeals court compared Indiana and Illinois law on whether an arbitration agreement could bind plaintiffs in a wrongful death claim after the agreement signee’s death.¹⁴ Under Illinois law, precedent stated that a wrongful death claim operated outside of the arbitration agreement signed by the decedent because wrongful death claims are not “on behalf of the decedent.”¹⁵ Conversely, Indiana law required that wrongful death claims could only be brought if the decedent would have been able to bring them on their own behalf (if they had survived).¹⁶ Therefore, the arbitration agreement would only apply if Indiana law was found to be governing law.¹⁷ Following a final analysis of the state laws and public policy, the court concluded that Indiana law applied.¹⁸

Potential plaintiffs should be aware of the binding nature of arbitration agreements and the importance of choice of law provisions. This case makes clear the significant effect that different state laws can have on a potential wrongful death claim. White v. Wright also clarifies how a decedent’s actions and signature can potentially bind their survivors and beneficiaries.