Kristi Norgart McBride lived with her husband in Santa Rosa, California. Kristi suffered from manic-depressive mental illness (now called bipolar disorder). In this disease, the person cycles between manic (ultrahappy, expansive, extroverted) episodes and depressive episodes. The disease is often treated with prescription drugs. Kristi attempted suicide. A psychiatrist prescribed an antianxiety drug. One year later, Kristi attempted suicide again by overdosing on drugs. The doctor prescribed Halcion, a hypnotic drug, and added Darvocet-N, a mild narcotic analgesic. In October, after descending into a severe depression, Kristi committed suicide by overdosing on Halcion and Darvocet-N. In October, exactly six years after Kristi’s death, Leo and Phyllis Norgart, Kristi’s parents, filed a lawsuit against the Upjohn Company, the maker of Halcion, for wrongful death based on Upjohn’s alleged failure to warn of the unreasonable dangers of taking Halcion. There was a one-year statute of limitations for bringing wrongful death actions. Upjohn made a motion for summary judgment based on the fact that the one-year statute of limitations for wrongful death actions had run. Can i’s parents pursue their wrongful death lawsuit against Upjohn? Is it ethical for the Upjohn Company to avoid possible liability by asserting the statute of limitations? Norgart v. The Upjohn Company, 21 Cal.4th 383, 87 Cal.Rpt.2nd 453, Web 1999 Cal. Lexis 5308 (Supreme Court of California)