Originally Posted by withak
That makes sense. The point of suing someone in this situation wouldn't be to punish the evildoer (that's the court's job, theoretically), but to compensate any other victims for the financial loss, of which there was none if the guy didn't have a family depending on his income.
I don't know the law but I doubt this is true.
Don't people sue regularly for punitive damages? The big buck kind for corporate mistakes, like silicon breast implants and asbestos. Why couldn't the dead man's parents sue for that?